IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2008 / 20TH ASHADHA 1930 Tr.P(Crl.).No. 45 of 2008() --------------------------- CRIME NO.55/07 OF RANNI POLICE STATION AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP.891/2007 IN CC.189/2007 of J.M.F.C.,RANNI .................... PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------ JOYCEE OLIVER, W/O. FRANK OLIVER SIYON HOUSE, DHARMADAM THALASSERRY, KANNUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.M.T.BALAN SMT.B.VIJUBALA RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED & STATE: --------------------------------------------------- 1. A.G. FRANK OLIVER, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. GEORGE KOSY ANAKUZHIYIL HOUSE, RANNI. 2. CHINNAMMA GEORGE, AGED 71 YEARS, W/O. GEORGE KOSY, DO. DO 3. SANTHAMMA BELONGS TO THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RESIDING AT DO. DO. 4. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R4 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T.P.(Crl).No. 45 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of July, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner is the defacto complainant in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 498A I.P.C. Her husband aged 55 years and mother-in-law aged above 70 years along with her sister-in-law face indictment in the prosecution. That case is now pending before the JFMC, Ranni. Cognizance was taken on the basis of the final report submitted by the police after due investigation. That crime, in turn, was registered on the basis of a private complaint filed by the petitioner before the learned Magistrate at Ranni and forwarded to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. 2. The petitioner now prays that the case pending before the JFMC, Ranni may be ordered to be transferred to the Courts at Kannur, where the petitioner is residing and where, before the Family Court litigations between the spouses are pending. The petitioner contends that getting the prosecution under Section T.P.(Crl).No. 45 of 2008 2 498A I.P.C. transferred to the court at Kannur will cater to the interests of justice. The matrimonial home is admittedly at Ranni. The petitioner has a strained relationship with her husband and in-laws. It will be inconvenient to proceed to Ranni to conduct the prosecution. The husband is not likely to suffer any difficulties, because, at any rate, he has to appear before the Family Court at Kannur. In these circumstances a view in favour of the petitioner may be taken and the case may be transferred, prays the learned counsel. 3. I have considered all the relevant inputs. Not the husband alone, but his mother aged 71 years and his sister are also facing the indictment. I must also note that it is a case where the petitioner herself has chosen to initiate proceedings before the Court at Ranni. The mere fact that the husband may have to come to the Family Court at Kannur to prosecute/defend certain proceedings pending before that Court is no reason to compel the husband and his relatives to come all the way to Kannur to defend the case. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that there is no merit in the prayer for transfer. The petitioner need only go once to give evidence before the Court at Ranni, whereas T.P.(Crl).No. 45 of 2008 3 all the accused will have to come to Kannur to defend the prosecution launched against them. I am satisfied that it is not necessary to invoke the powers of transfer in the facts and circumstances of this case. 4. This petition is accordingly dismissed. (R. BASANT) Judge tm