1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Criminal Application No.1172/2010 (Sushama Vinod Kirnapure .vs. State of Mah. and ors. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders Ms. Tapadia, Advocate for Applicant Mr. N.R. Rode, APP for Respondent no.1. Mr. S.S. Murthy, Advocate for Respondents 2 to 7. CORAM : P.D. KODE, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 17, 2010 Heard. 2. The request made by applicant/first informant for transfer of Regular Criminal Case No. 3 of 2007 for commission of offence under Section 498-A of IPC pending on the file of learned J.M.F.C. Sakoli (District Bhandara) to the Court at Nagpur is strictly not objected by the accused- respondents no.2 to 7. However, while consenting for said prayer for transfer , the respondents no.2 to 7 have denied the allegations levelled against them in the application preferred. Additionally respondent no.2 on the count of residing at Sangadi, has also requested for permitting him to make an appropriate application for exemption before the trial Court. 3. The request for transfer is primarily founded 2 upon ground of convenience to the parties. The learned counsel for the applicant has urged that since the applicant was residing along with respondent no.2 at Sangadi, she had then lodged the first information report with concerned Sakoli Police Station. As a result of the investigation commenced upon the said FIR, the Police had submitted the charge sheet against respondents no.2 to 7 and thereon the case sought to be transferred was registered. It is urged that except respondent no.2, all other respondents are residing at Nagpur district. It is further urged that even out of 14 cited witnesses, 6 witnesses are from Koradi which is at a distance of about 20 kms. from Nagpur. All the said submissions are not controverted by the prosecution. Though the prosecution agency was asked to file a reply stating inconvenience, if any, to the witnesses and about the expenditure likely to be incurred in the event accepting the request of transfer as sought, no reply throwing light upon said aspect is filed by the prosecution. 4. Having regard to the aforesaid, apparently there is substance in submission of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant and so also many of the witnesses would be put to much inconvenience for attending the Court at Sakoli for giving the evidence as they would be requiring to travel the distance of 120 kms. from Nagpur. Having regard to the same and since every criminal trial is required to be completed as expeditiously as possible without putting parties to the trial with undue hardship, the prayer made in the 3 application deserves to be allowed. 5. Regular Criminal Case No. 3 of 2007 pending on the file of J.M.F.C. Sakoli (District Bhandara) stands transferred to the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur (District Nagpur) for disposing the same in accordance with law. It is open for the learned C.J.M. to try and dispose of the said case by himself or by allotting it to the suitable Court. Liberty to respondent no.2 to apply the trial Court for exemption in accordance with law. 6. The said case stands fixed before the learned CJM, Nagpur on 28.10.2010. JUDGE halwai