High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus questioning the impugned proceedings Cr. No. Bl21l2O22lDCM, Dl. 29-04-2025 served on the Petitioner on 07-05-2025 by the 2nd Respondent for confiscating the Mahindra Thar vehicle bearing No. TS 08-JZ-0005 in favour of Government which was seized in COR. No. 06 of 2025 dt. 20-01-2025 on the file of Proh. and Excise Police Station Sangarereddy by rejecting to grant interim custody in favour of the Petitioner without concluding the.trial is ex facie erroneous, illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently set aside the impugned Proceedings Cr. No. Bl21l2022lDCM, dI. 29-04-2025 (served on the Petitioner on 07 -05-2025) issued by the 2nd Respondent and forthwith release the vehicle in favour the Petitioner. :!; lA NO: 1 OF 2o2s Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumsr:ances stated in the affidavit filed in s,upport of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to r-.[ease the petitioner's Mahindra Thar vehicle bearing No. TS 08-JZ-0005 seized in coR. No. 06 of 2o2s dt.2o-o1-202s on the l,ile of proh. and Excise Policer Station Sangarereddy in favour of the peiitioner forth with, pending disposal of the main case. Counsel for the Petit,oner: SRI PALLE SRIHARINATH Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRt R.LAXMIKANTH REDDY, ,AGp FOR counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: sRl p.vlsHAL, AGp FoR pRoHrBrfloN HOME AND EXCISE DEPT The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO WRIT PETITIO N No.151O2 of2025 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief: "For the reasons stated in the accornpanying afhdavit, it is hereby prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issuc an order or direction more particularly onc in the naturc of writ of mandamus questioning the impugned proceedings Cr.No.B I 2l I 2022 / DCM, Dt.29.O4.2025 served on the 2"d the Petitioner on 07.O5.2O25 by Rcspondent for conl-rsc:lting the Mahindra Thar vehicle bearing No.TS O8-JZ OOO5 in favour of Government which was seized in COR No.O6 of 2025 dt.2o.OI.2O25 on thc file of Proh. and Dxcise Police Station Sangarercddy by rejecting to grant interim custody in favour of the Petitioner without concluding the trial is cx facie erroneous, illeg:rl, arbitrary and unjust and consequently set aside the impugned Procccdings Cr.No.B l2l /2022 I DCM, dt.29.O4.2O25 (served on the Petitioner on O7.O5.2O251 issued by the 2"d Respondent ancl favour the forthwith release the vehicle in Petitioner and pass such other order or orders as deem fit and proper in the interest of justice."

2. Heard Sri Palle Sriharinath, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri R.Laxmikanth Reddy, learned Assistant FI r 2 Govr:rnmerrt Pleader for Home Department, appearing for responden, No. 1; and Sri P.Vishal, leerrned \ssistant Govr:r:rmerr: Pleader for Prohibitio.n and Excise Depzrrtnrer t, appearing for respondent Nos.2 and [] 3 . With the consent of the learned counsel for the partres, the u'rit petition 1S disposed of at the stage of arlm ission

4. Brief f,acts of the case:

4.1. The letitioner averred that he is the ou'r-rr,r ol the Mahinrlra Thar vehicle bearing No.TS 0B JZ 0005 (herr'inafte - referred to as, "the subject vehicle") rvl'rich u'as purchasecl 15' availing financial assistance' from r private finarLcier. lt is further averred that live fironths cacl<. he place:d the subject vehicle in "Zoorn Car", uhich rs car shar.ng mer ket place. The "Zoom Car" conl1e cts h,)sts with guests, whc choose from the selection ol cars lc r use at affor,lable Prices, promoting smart transportation :.rolutions in India. Irrr each booking on "Zoom Car", the zrggregate arrlount u-a s; charged from the guest who booked the car Acco'dingll., llne "Zoom Car" platform provides hcsts. On 3

17.O1.2025, one person, namely Harjoth Singh, has booked the petitioner's subject vehicle through "Zoom Car" for four days through booking number ID-JPSNOQB0D and he had to return the same by 2O.O1.2O25. However, he did not return the subject vehicle to the petitioner.

4.2. It is further averred that on 20.O1.2025, the Assistant Commissioner, Enforcement Team, Medak Division, checked the subj ect vehicle at Malkapur Flyover in the presence of panchas and during the said checking, they detected contraband i.e., O.I2 grams of Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) Crystals from the possession of Harjoth Singh under cover of a panchanama and accordingly a crime in COR No.6 of 2O25 was registered for the olfences under Sections 8(c) read with Section 22(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as, "the NDPS Act"), against Harjoth Singh and seized the subject vehicle. It is further averred that a Drug Disposal Committee was constituted for the purpose of disposal of the seized items. Accordingly, the Drug Disposal 4 Committ.ee has issued notice dated I 1 .03.2025 lirecting the petitior r:r to submit explanation, if an.r'. u ithr n zr pcriod of 15, rlals l:-om the date of receipt of the noticc. ltrrsuant to th€ sarrre, the petitioner submitted expl:rrl rtiorr on

03.0,+.202: stating that he has no knori)edgc i_rlror_r1 the a1leg,:cl t rzrr r sportation of MDMA and he has nor ,.c,mmitted 2n1, ,1ff6r11'1 and requested respondent No.2 to rclease the subjoct ',,ci- jcle. Respondent No.2, without considr:ring the said r-'xpiarratior-t, passed thc impugne,l orrle r ciatcd 29 .O.+.2L)'2: rcjecting the request of the pcriri )ner for release ol ;ublect vehicle on interim custod\, u'ithout assrgnrng ir nv reasons. Hence, the present ri rit 1>,.tition is Submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner:

5. Letrnre d counsel for the petitioner subnritrcrl tl-rar the petitioner L as not committed any offence lutder the provisions ri the NDPS Act. The alleged <:ontrab.rnd was seizerl frorr the possession of Harjoth Sit'rgh r>r-rly. The petitiolrer prrchased the subject vehicle through private financier ard eking out his livelihood through : he said '..'.:--]i:*s!a.,'.l'+-. .j 5 vehicle. He further submitted that the petitioner submitted an application before respondent No.2 for release of the subject vehicle on interim custody explainihg the reasons. Considering the a-foresaid explanation, the impugned order was passed without assigning any reasons, which is in gross violation of principles of natural justice. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the conditions which may be imposed by this Court and unless the subject vehicle IS released, the petitioner will be put to great hardship. Submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleaders appearing for the respondents:

6. Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise Department appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submitted that the petitioner's subject vehicie was involved in a grave offence and the contraband i.e., O.l2 grams of MDMA Crystals, was seized from the subject vehicle and the petitioner is not entitled for release of the said vehicle. ) _t 6

7. Learned Assistalt Government Pleader for Home Department appearing for respondent No. 1 also r,::iterated the ven, sarrLe submissions Analvsis oll the case: B. HavinE; considered the rival submissions macle brr the respectiYe parties and on a perusal of the material available ln record, it reveals that the l,.ssistant Comrnissto--rer Enforcement Tearn, Medak l)ivision, condur:tcd vehicle inspection and seized the cor trabald i.e., 0.12 glams of MDMA Crystals, from the possr,:ssion of Harjoth Sinqh and registered the crime in COR No.6 of 2025 and 'he same is pending on the file of the learned Special .Juc[ cial Magistrate of First Class for trierl of cases under TeLarrgana Prohibition & Excise Act, San,3areddy. Now t1-re ., sr-rbject vehicle is in the custod5' of respondent No.2. The record further discloses that respondr:nt No.2 issue d not ce on 11.O3.2O25 exercising the po\vers conferrred -: nder Rule 52A read with Rule 1 9 of the Narcotics l) :ugs & Psychotropic Substances Rule s, 1985, directingthr: petitioner to submit explanation as to whv the 7 subject vehicle should not be confrscated' Pursualt to the said notice, the petitioner submitted the explanation on O3.O4.2O25, wherein he stated that he has.not committed the aforesaid crime and the alleged contraband was seized from the possession of Harj oth Singh' The petitioner also requested respondent No.2 to release the subject vehicle on interim custodY and the said request was refused bY the imPugned order dated No.2 through without assigning any reasons' Even 29.O4.2025 according to the leamed Assistant Government P'leader for Prohibition and Excise Department, the subject vetricle was respondent not involved in any other offences' g. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct respondent Nos.2 and 3 to release the subject vehicle i.e., Mahindra Thar vehicle bearing No'TS-O8-JZ- OOO5, to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: The petitioner sha-Il furnish the bank guarantee (i) for an amount of Rs.1,00,O00/- (Rupees one lakh only) from any Nationalized Bank before respondent Nos'2 and 3; .\\ I I 8 (ii) 'lhe petitioner shall give an undertaking that he vlill nc,t alienate the subject vehicle or create ae-i/ third partS' rights in any manner till the , disposal of the procee clings before the learned Special J rrdicial Magist r ate of First Class for trial of cases under Telanp.e ina Prohibition & Excise Act, Sangared Cy, or other a rpropriate authority, as the case may be. 't'he petitioner shall produce o riginal (iii) Regisl-ation Certilicate of the subject vehicle ,lt the time o '' release of the vehicle. (i") 'lhe petitioner shall produce the subjecr. ,,'ehicle before the respondent authorities as arrcl when requirt:,1. (u) r\fter release, if the petitioner's subject vet.icle is involvr,rl in similar offence, t1-e respondent s are entrt1e,1 to file an appropriate application seeki ng for custodl of the said vehicle.

10. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petit..on IS disposed o1. No order as to costs. Misce llaneous applications pending, if anv, shail stand closecl. //TRUE COPY// SD/- P. PI6iiNA I.RISH[I-[=-' ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,) l SECTION OFFICER \-'

3. 4 5 The Principal Sooretary Home Department Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana. The Deputy Cornmissioner, Prohibition and Excise, Medak Division at Sangareddy. Sar gareddy District. The Station Hor sre Officer, Proh. and Excise Police Station, Sangareddy Sangareddy Distlict. One CC to SRI rALLE SRIHARINATH, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP t:OR HOME, Hiqh Court for the State of Telanq;rna, at I To I I 1Mx b ?J,1"#to 6?"R- PRoHlBlrloN & EXCISE' Hish court for the State of i;;G;;;atHYderabad [oUr]

7. Two CD CoPies / PSK. GJP l HIGH COURT DATED:1410512025 ,, , ORDER \ WP.No.15102 ot 2025 5', ' ar, :...: e r-j -_i -s t\ n, .\*^ 1\ ,rb ':'.) DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS // 1t /5,/5,/,15