LAWS(APH)-2002-12-94

IMMANDI SATYAVATHI Vs. STATE OF A P

Decided On December 20, 2002
IMMANDI SATYAVATHI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri E.V.Bhagiratha Rao, learned Counsel representing the petitioners (A-1 and A-2), Smt. K. Sesha Rajyam, learned Public Prosecutor and Sri K. Chaitanya, learned Counsel representing the defacto complainant, 2nd respondent herein.

(2.) The criminal petition is filed to quash the orders of transfer dated 22-2-2002 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam transferring S.C. No.29/2001 from the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Anakapalle to the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Chodavaram. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows:

(3.) The 2nd respondent, who is the wife of the 2nd petitioner and daughter-in-law of the 1st petitioner lodged a report dated 27-5-2000 with the S.H.O., Town Police Station, Anakapalle and on the basis of the said report a case in Cr.No.109/2000 was registered for the offence under Sections 498-A and 307 read with 34, IPC. After investigation the police filed the charge-sheet on 25-10-2000. It is stated that the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Anakapalle took up the case on file after committal as S.C.No. 29/2001 and issued summons to the petitioners. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge gave Schedule for trial from 1 -3-2002. It is also stated that the petitioner engaged a local Senior Advocate by paying fee and were ready to face trial. It is further stated that the learned District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam passed the order dated 22-2-2002 withdrawing the case in S.C.No.29/2001 from the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Anakapalle transferring the case to the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Chodavaram. It is also stated that the transferring the said case is not on administrative grounds as can be seen from the order dated 22-2-2002. It is only on an application filed by the de facto complainant dated 18-2-2002. It was also stated that the petitioners are not aware of the said application and no notice was given to the petitioners and hence the order of transfer is unjust and violative of the principles of natural justice.