High Court · 2025

PetitronunderArticle226oftheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to ISSUE Order or direction more particularly a Writ of Mandamus' to declare the action of 3rd Respondent in not issuing Orders directing the 3rd Respondent for Release of Vehicle i e ' Tata lntra Auto(2022 Model) bearing Reg.No.TS-04-UD-9913 seized in F lR No 241 of 2025 in spite of her readiness to furnish third party surety' as being illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the Respondents to release the above said vehicle by accepting the third party surety, and to grant such other relief or reliefs' IA NO: 10 F 2025 petition under sectlon 151 Cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affrdavit frred rn support of the petitron. the Hrgh court may be pleased to DIRECT the 2nd Respondent herein to issue Orders directrng the 3rd Respondent to Release the Petitioners Tata lntra AuIo (2022 Model) bearrng Reg'No'TS-04' UD-9913 seized in F l R No 241 of 2025'pending disposal of the Wrrt Petition Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI P'RAMULU Counsel for the Respondents: ASST- GP FOR PROHIBITION EXCISE THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.28293 OF 2025 ORDER: Heard Sri P.Ramuiu, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise.

2. Petitioner herein is the absolute owner and possessor of Tata Intra Auto bearing registration No.TS-04-UD-9913 (subject vehicle). In proof of the same, he has filed copy of Registration Certificate (RC). The said vehicle was seized on 15.08.2025 in connection with FIR No.241 of 2025 by Respondent No.3. The said crime was registered for the offence punishable under Section 3a(E) of Telangana State Excise Act, 1968 and 7(A) r/w.8(e) of the Telangana State Prohibition Act, 1995. Accused is the Driver to whom the petitioner entrusted the vehicle for transporation. The allegation leveled against the accused is that he r,r,as trarsporting 10 bags of black jaggery (50 kgs each) Alum 2 bags (50kgs each) and 20 litres of ID liquor.

3. It is the specilic contention of the petitioner herein that

3.a resp&Efbnt violated the procedure prescribed under ttre Act in se2ing the subject vehicle. The vehicle is very essential for 2 making his livelihood. The vehicle is now in the custody of g.a respondent. He has no knowledge of the illegal transportation of contraband in his vehicle. If the said vehicle is exposed to Sun, rain and dust, it will get spoiled. If the vehicle is not returned to him, he cannot make his livelihood

4. In the light of the aforesaid submissions, it is relevalt to note that in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujaratl, the Apex Court held that whatever be the situation, it is of no use to keep such-seized vehicles at the police stations for a long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the said vehicles, if required at any point of time. This can be done pending hearing of applications for return of such vehicles. Various High Courts in the judgments stated above, after referring to various provisions of the Act, inch-rding Sections - 52-A, 60 and 63 and various provisions of Cr.P.C., and also the principle lajd dorvn in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra), ordered to l;e released the vehicles seized rn the crimes for lhe offences undr:r the Act. ' lzooz; ro scc zss 1

5. In view of the principle laid down by the Apex Court and the respective High Courts in the judgments referred to above, coming to the case on hand, it is not in dispute that the petitioner is owner of the above crime vehicle and the salne was seized in the above crime. The subject vehicle is 2022 make. In proof of the same, he has l-rled coPy of Certificate of Registratlon.

6. Considering the fact that the petitioner is using the subject vehicle for his livelihood. The subject vehicle can be released subject to further proceedings under the Prohibition & Excise Act, on certain terms. 7 . In the light of the aforesaid discussion, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- i. 3.a respondent is directed to release the subject vehicle Tata Intra Auto bearing registration No.TS-04-UD-9913 subject to condition of the petitioner executing a self-bond for Rs.SO,OOO/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety for like sum. ii. The petitioner sha-li also furnish an undertaking that he will not alienate or change the physical features of the vehicle. ./ I

111. IV.

3.a respondent shall wrire to the RTA authority not to transf-er the vehicje in favour of all. third party without clearance from the Excise Department. Needless to say, release of the vehicle is subject to the orders that shall be passed by 3ra respondent authority pursuant to the enquiry to be conducted under the provisions of the Excise Act. Consequently, miscella:reous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed. SD/-A. SRINIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /U' //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Prrncrpa Secretary, Revenue (Excrse) Department s;tate Of Telangana' Secretariat, llYderabad

2. The Deputy Cc'mmissloner Of Proh' And Excise' \'A'larangal Dtvisron VJarangal District.

3. The Station House Officer' Dornakal Police Station lr/ahabubabad District 4. One CC to SRI P RAI\4ULU' Advocate' IOPUC] 5.TwoCcStoGPFoRPRoHlBlTloNExClSE,HighCourtfortheStateof Telangana. IOUT] o Two CD CoPies BSK BS W HIGH COURT DATED:1 810912025 ----*_l'_;\ ---'_ ..,' .;.- ' '-' e*):.. . /' )\. 1,i i 0 3 tIT Zl[i i;l ri't.' ,=-,r' ,,- .''/ .^,-t-.'/' ==:::-i92- ,. , , ), \,:' t\-* ORDER WP.No.28293 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITTON WITHOUT COSTS q I b ,,r \0