Vehicle owners bear responsibility for illegal use by third parties unless clear evidence of innocence is provided.

ORDER :

(T. VINOD KUMAR, J.)

This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the 2^nd respondent in passing order, vide proceedings No.4539/2016/CPE/TS/D1 dt.11.08.2016, confirming the order passed by the 3^rd respondent in Cr.No.C/72/2016/DCM dt.04.07.2016, as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice, and with a consequential direction to the respondents to release the petitioner’s vehicle i.e. Auto Rickshaw bearing registration No.AP 23 W 7545.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent No.4 and perused the record.

3. Briefly stated, the case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the vehicle i.e. Auto Rickshaw bearing registration No.AP 23 W 7545; that he is eking out his livelihood by giving the aforesaid vehicle on daily hire basis; that on the fateful day, he had given the aforesaid vehicle on daily hire basis to one Kavali Ramesh of the same village to drive the vehicle; that the aforesaid vehicle taken on daily hire basis was used for illegal transportation of liquor in the outskirts of Kollur Village; that the petitioner is not arrayed as an accused in Crime No.102 of 2016 dt.27.02.2016 registered in connection with the aforesaid illegal transportation of liquor; and that there is no mens rea on the part of the petitioner either in giving his vehicle on daily hire basis or with regard to his involvement in the aforesaid crime and thus, the vehicle which is confiscated by the respondents-authorities ought to have been released by the respondents to the petitioner.

4. Petitioner further contends that except the fact that one K.Ramesh, who is resident of Kollur Villave, wherein the petitioner resides, had taken the subject vehicle on daily hire basis from the petitioner, he is no way concerned with the alleged illegal transportation of liquor either by K.Ramesh, or the person, who had engaged the services of the said Ramesh for transporting liquor without having any valid permission or licence from the concerned authority, contravening the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968 (for short, ‘the Act’), thereby rendering the contraband i.e. liquor bottles illegally being transported along with the subject vehicle belonging to the petitioner liable for confiscation.

5. It is also contended by the petitioner that the 3^rd respondent without considering his request for release of the vehicle, had erroneously passed the confiscation order which has further been affirmed by the 2^nd respondent without considering the non-involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the aforesaid crime.

6. Per contra, learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 would submit that though the petitioner claims to be owner of the subject vehicle and not being aware of its usage in illegal transportation of liquor, he cannot absolve himself of liability of the subject vehicle being used for illegal transportation of large quantity of liquor without any valid permission or licence from the concerned authority.

7. On behalf of the respondents, it is also contended that the subject vehicle being claimed by the petitioner was found to be carrying consignment of liquor i.e. 1028 bottles of various brands of IML liquor and beer including defence liquor; that the petitioner on being issued with a show cause notice by the 3^rd res