Criminal Petition No. 493 of 2025 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12119 CRL.P No. 493 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 493 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. CHAITHRASHREE C.S., D/O SHIVAPRAKASH C.S. W/O NAYAN D.B, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS R/AT TANK ROAD NAGAMANGALA MANDYA DISTRICT–571 432. PRESENTLY R/AT 4TH MAIN GOVINDARAJ NAGARA VIJAYA NAGARA BENGALURU-560 040 MOB: 9738376886. Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND: (BY SRI. AKRAM PASHA K., ADVOCATE) …PETITIONER 1. NAYANA D.B., S/O LATE DARMESH D.B., AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, SDA, OFFICER OF THE COMMANDANT KARNATAKA STATE INDUSTRIAL SECURITY POLICE, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU-560 063 MOB: 9738376886 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12119 CRL.P No. 493 of 2025 2. RUKMINI W/O LATE DARMESH D.B., AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS THE RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2 ARE R/O. NO.13, LAKE VIEW GARDEN LAYOUT K. CHANNASANDRA, HORAMAVU BENGALURU – 560 043. 3. KIRAN (KAPPE) H/O VISHALAKSHI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/O ECHALA KOPPA VILLAGE HOSANAGARA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 417. 4. NAVEEN D.B. S/O DARMESH D.B., AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS 5. ARPITHA W/O NAVEEN D.B., AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS THE RESPONDENTS NO.4 AND 5 ARE R/O. NO.23/1, 1ST MAIN ROAD ANJANEYASWAMY LAYOUT THINDLU, VIDYARANYAPURA BENGALURU – 560 097.
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. JAYARAJ D.S., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5) …RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 407 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO TRANSFER THE CRL.MIS.CASE NO.22/2024, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT NAGAMANGALA TO CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (TRAFFIC COURT) AT BENGALURU, BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION AND GRANT SUCH OTHER FURTHER RELIEFS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12119 CRL.P No. 493 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This petition is filed under Section 407 of Cr.P.C praying this Court to transfer the Crl.Misc.No.22/2024 on the file of Senior Civil Judge & JMFC at Nagamanagala to Chief Judicia Magistrate (Traffic Court) at Bangalore by allowing the petition and grounds urged in the petition is that respondent No.1 is the husband of the petitioner and respondent No.2 is the mother of respondent No.1. The respondent Nos.3 and 4 are the brothers of respondent No.1. The respondent No.5 is the sister of respondent No.1. It is contended that respondents are also residing at Bangalore. The counsel would contend that earlier 498A petition was filed in the Bangalore and the same is numbered as C.C.No.71439/2024 pending on the file of XI Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bangalore. When already one case is pending before the Bangalore and respondents - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12119 CRL.P No. 493 of 2025 are also residing at Bangalore, no prejudice will be caused to the respondents if the case is transferred to the Bangalore. Hence, the same may be transferred from Nagamangala to Bangalore. 3. Per Contra, the counsel appearing for the respondent would contend that when the criminal proceedings was initiated against the respondent in C.C.No.71439/2024 and only with an intention to harass the respondent, the Crl.Misc was filed before the Nagamangala Court. The counsel also would contend that now respondent No.1 is transferred to Shivamogga and he is working at Shivamogga. The counsel also would vehemently contend that relying upon the order passed by the Apex Court in transfer Petition criminal No.700- 701/2023 when the relief was sought to transfer the case from Bangalore to Vishakapatnam, Andrapradesh only on the ground that as she has shifted her residence to Vishakapatnam and an observation is made that petitioner having herself filed the cases at Bangalore and not entitled - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12119 CRL.P No. 493 of 2025 to seek transfer of them to other Court outside the State merely for convenience and dismiss the same. The counsel by referring this order also would contend that conveniently filed the case before the Nagamangala Court and cannot seek for transfer of the case to Bangalore. 4. In reply to this argument, the counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that earlier she was staying along with her parents at Nagamangala jurisditoin and hence, petition was filed at Nagamangala and not having any intention to harass the respondent. 5. Having heard the petitioner’s counsel and also counsel for respondent, both of them not disputes the fact that a criminal case is pending before the Bangalore Court and also the very case of the petitioner that after registration of C.C case, she went and stayed along with parents and now pursuing her future shifting her residence to Bangalore and staying along with brother and also taking into note of other respondents are residing in Bangalore as well as other case is also pending before the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:12119 CRL.P No. 493 of 2025 Bangalore Court. No doubt, the Apex Court made an observation with regard to shifting of case, only based on her residence from Bangalore to Vishakapatna and the same is for transfer of case from one State to another State and factual facts of the case it is only between the distance of Nagamangala is about 80 Kms., from the Bangalore and also taking into note of other respondents are in Bangalore and criminal case is already in Bangalore, same will not cause any inconvenience to the respondent also to appear before the Bangalore Court. Hence, it is appropriate to transfer the case from Nagamangala to Bangalore Traffic Court where matters are dealt under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. 6. The counsel appearing for the respondent brought to notice of this Court that though the petitioner has examined long back before the Trial Court on 17.08.2024 and she was not cross examined and adjournment was taken on the ground of settlement but - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:12119 CRL.P No. 493 of 2025 no such settlement was effected between the parties and counsel also submits that the direction may be given to the Court to dispose of the matter within a time bound period. Hence, there is a force in the contention of the counsel appearing for the respondent. 7. Both the counsel for respective parties submits that direction may be given to dispose of the matter within six months and both counsels are going to assist the Trial Court in disposal of the matter within time bound period. 8. Hence, I pass the following:
Decision
ORDER i) The Petition is allowed. ii) The Crl.Misc.No.22/2024 pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Nagamangala Court is directed to be transferred to JMFC (Traffic Court) at Bangalore. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:12119 CRL.P No. 493 of 2025 iii) Both the parties are directed to appear before the JMFC (Traffic Court) at Bangalore on 25.04.2025 without expecting any notice from the Court. iv) The parties and counsels are directed to assist the Trial Court in disposal of the case within a time bound period as directed by this Court. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE RHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 57