APHC010058832026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3332]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 3586/2026 Between:

Mummidisetty Nukaraju, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. M. SAPTHAGIRI Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR HOME

2. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following order:

The present writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not releasing the petitioner’s Bolero vehicle bearing No.AP 30 X 3109 seized in Crime No.79/2025 at Gantyada Police Station and in E.C.Act Case No.39/2025/G6.

2. Heard Sri M.Sapthagiri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit would contend that, on 04.06.2025, the 4^th respondent (Police) seized the petitioner’s vehicle along with 33 rice bags alleging that the rice was PDS rice and registered a crime vide Crime No.79 of 2025 against him at Gantyada Police Station. He would further contend that, consequently, confiscation proceedings were also initiated under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 in E.C.Act Case No.39/2025/G6 before the 2^nd respondent (Joint Collector) and a show cause notice under Section 6-B of the Act, 1955 was issued, to which the petitioner had submitted his explanation. He further submitted that, since the vehicle is not contraband, it can be released subject to conditions and if it is kept idle in the premises of police station exposing vagaries of the nature such as sun and rain, the parts of the vehicle including engine would get rusted causing irreparable loss to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayed to direct the respondent authorities to release the seized vehicle.

4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader, submitted that since the confiscation proceedings are pending consideration, if this Court inclines to interfere, a direction may be given to the authorities to release the seized vehicle upon furnishing personal bonds to the value of the stock.

5. Perused the record and considered the submissions of both the learned counsel.

6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, since the confiscation proceedings initiated against the petitioner are still pending consideration and the authorities have an intention to release the vehicle upon furnishing personal bonds equivalent to the value of the seized stock, this court is inclined to pass the following order:

“The respondent authority concerned- Joint Collector is directed to release the seized vehicle bearing No.AP 30 X 3109 upon furnishing personal bonds equivalent to the value of the seized stock, as expeditiously as possible not later than one(01) week from the date of receipt of copy of this order.”

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

BRS