SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(AP) 311

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
BATTU DEVANAND, J.
T. Chennarao, W/o. Srirama Murthi - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No.24979 of 2021
Decided on : 01-11-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Penuballi Ramesh Babu.
For the Respondent: GP For Prohibition Excise.

Point of Law: If vehicle is kept idle in the police station, which is to be exposed to sun and rain, the vehicle will be damaged and it also lose its roadworthiness.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 - Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995 - Section 7(A) and 8(e) - Powers of High court to issue certain - Writ Petition – Whether it is appropriate to release said vehicle in favour of petitioner on certain terms and conditions to meet interest of justice.

Finding of the Court : It is appropriate to release said vehicle in favour of petitioner on certain terms and conditions to meet interest of justice.

Result: Writ Petition is disposed of.

ORDER :

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record.

2) With the consent of both the counsel, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.

3) The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the vehicle i.e., Hero HF Deluxe motor cycle registered bearing No. AP 16 EL 1585. The petitioner using this motor cycle for doing his vegetable business and eking out livelihood. On 05.09.2021, the 3rd respondent has seized the said motor cycle alleging that he is in possession of 10 liters of I.D. liquor in 10 letters capacity white plastic can and 1000 liters of F.J. wash in five plastic drums each drum contains 200 liters of F.J wash and accordingly registered a case in Cr.No.224 of 2021 under Section 7(A) r/w 8(e) of Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent initiated proceedings for confiscation of the seized vehicle before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner made a representation on 11.10.2021 to the 2nd respondent seeking custody of the seized vehicle pending confiscation proceedings. As no orders are passed on the representation submitted by the petitioner, the present Writ Petition is filed.

4) Learned Government Pleader submits that to consider the representation of the petitioner for interim custody of the vehicle, the 2nd respondent ought to have get a valuation of the vehicle through the concerned RTI officials. After obtaining the value of the vehicle, the representation of the petitioner will be considered.

5) Having heard the submissions of both the counsels and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is an admitted fact that the motor cycle of the petitioner was seized on 05.09.2021 and the same was kept in the police station premises of the 3rd respondent. If the said vehicle is kept idle in the police station, which is to be exposed to sun and rain, the vehicle will be damaged and it also lose its roadworthiness. Under the circumstances, if the vehicle is damaged, it is not useful for petitioner and respondents.

6) In view of the same, in the considered opinion of this Court, it is appropriate to release the said vehicle in favour of the petitioner on certain terms and conditions to meet the interest of justice.

7) Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:

    1) The respondent No.2 is directed to consider the representation dated 11.10.2021 of the petitioner and release the motor cycle i.e., Hero HF Deluxe motor cycle registered bearing No. AP 16 EL 1585 in favour of the petitioner on furnishing immovable security equivalent to the value of the seized motor cycle within one (1) week from today.

2) The petitioner is directed not to alienate the vehicle or change the physical features or create any encumbrance on the said vehicle.

3) The petitioner shall produce the vehicle whenever it is required by the concerned authorities during pendency of the proceedings before them.

There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top