IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 19.12.2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM Crl.O.P.No.18002 of 2009 V.Sangeetha ..Petitioner/Defacto Complainant Vs 1. The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station Suramangalam, Salem City. 2. Sethupathy Ramalingam, 3. Jothi 4. Meenakshi Anuradha 5. Parameswaran ..Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to withdraw and transfer of case in C.C.No.129/2009 now pending trial on the file of the Judicial Magistrate II, Salem to any other Court of competent Jurisdiction in Dharmapuri District. For Petitioner : M/s.S.Jayakumar For Respondent-1 : Mr.J.C.Durairaj, GA (Crl.Side) For R2 to R5 : Mr. H. Rajasekar ORDER This petition seeks transfer of proceedings in C.C.No.129/2009 now pending trial on the file of the Judicial Magistrate II, Salem to any other Court of competent Jurisdiction in Dharmapuri District. 2. The petitioner is the de-facto complainant in the case. Upon her complaint, a charge sheet has been laid for offences under Section 354, 498(A) IPC r/w. Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Section 3 and 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of (Harassment of Women) Act 1988 and Section 406 IPC and it is now pending trial in C.C.No.129/2009. As the 5th accused was not in India, the case against him has been split up and the case against other four accused is pending trial in C.C.No.129/2009. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. While in the petition, it has been stated that the 1st accused had threatened the petitioner when she had appeared in the Court on 8.7.2009 and that the list witnesses 3 to 4, who are the parents of the petitioner are aged persons suffering from serious ailment and they find it difficult to travel to Salem which has a distance of over 100 kms from Krishnagiri where they reside, in the course of hearing before this Court, it was informed that the witnesses 2 to 4 were made to appear before the lower Court as bailable warrant was issued against them and that the father of the petitioner had infact fainted while in the witness box. This is stoutly denied by the counsel for the respondent. Be that as it may, it is apparent that the petitioner and her family members have certain reservations about appearing the same lower Court. 4. On a detailed consideration, this Court is of the view that, though there is no reason whatsoever to doubt that the conduct of the lower Court is not in order and in keeping with law and though this Court considers that it is not a fit case for transfer to a Court in Krishnagiri, this Court keeping in mind the reservations of the petitioner and her family members and having considered the fact that justice only should not be done, but also should be seen to be done, directs the transfer of C.C.No.129/2009 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Salem to the Court of Judicial Magistrate- III, Salem. Upon transfer, the learned Judicial Magistrate-III, Salem shall complete the trial within the period of three months from the date of receipt of this Order. 5. This Court reiterates that the Order of transfer does not in any manner adversely reflect on the Court from which the case has been transferred. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar jvm To 1. The Judicial Magistrate II, Salem. 2. The Judicial Magistrate III, Salem. 3. The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station Suramangalam, Salem City. 4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. + 1 c.c. to Mr. S. Jayakumar, Advocate. S.R.No.70059. + 1 c.c. to Mr. H. Rajasekar, Advocate. S.R.No.70097. Crl.O.P.No.18002 of 2009 KS (CO) GSK 22.12.2009. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/