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

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 17467

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
V.SUJATHA
Bhoopalam Srinivasulu – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WP 9034/2023



##PAGE1##

2025:APHC:61061

APHC010178272023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3333]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

WRIT PETITION NO: 9034/2023

Between:

1. B HOOPALAM SRINIVASULU, S/O SATYANARAYANA AGE 50

YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O D.NO.2/252, GUN MEN STREET,

GARLADINNE MANDAL, ANANTAPURAM DISTRICT.

2. B HOOPALAM VISHNU VAMSI,, S/O SRINIVSULU AGE 21 YEARS,

OCC STUDENT, R/O D.NO.2/252, GEN MEN STREET,

GARLADINNE MANDAL, ANANTAPURAM DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLY DEPARTMENT, SECRETERIAT,

VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. T HE JOINT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLY, ANANTAPURAM DISTRICT,

ANANTAPURAM.

3. T HE TAHSILDAR, VIGILANCE AND ENFORCEMENT,

ANANTAPURAM.

4. T HE STATE S H O, ANANTAPUR IV TOWN POLICE STATION,

ANANTAPUR DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be

pleased topleased to issue any writ order or direction more particularly one in

##PAGE2##

VS,J

W.P No.9034 o2f0 2205:2A3P HC:61061

2

the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent

passed order in proceedings No. Rc.No.K3/522/2022 dated 20-12-2022

imposing monitor penalty 50percent of the value of the seized stock (Value of

the seized is Rs.2,10,000/-) is imposed as penalty on the vehicle

owner/petitioner to release the goods carriage vehicle bearing No.AP39-TT -

7797 was seized rice through Panchanama dated 13-10-2022 Opp Kia

showroom at National Highway 44, Anantapur- Bangalore Highway road,

Anantapur, by the respondent No.4 and registered criminal case against the

petitioner in Cr.No.240/2022 under section 420 r/w 34 IPC, 7 (1) of the E.C

Act, 1955 is wholly illegal, arbitrary , against law and principles of natural

justice and consequentially to set aside the orders passed by the 2nd

respondent and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated

in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased

pleased to direct the respondents 2 to 4 to release seized stocks 220 rice

bags (50 kg weight of each bag) and goods carriage vehicle bearing No.

AP39-TT-7797 which was seized by 4th respondent under Panchanama

dated;13-10-2022 by suspending the proceedings issued by 2nd respondent

in Rc.No.K3/522/2022 dated- 20-12¬2022 pending disposal of the writ Petition

and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. INENI VENKATA PRASAD

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR HOME

2. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

##PAGE3##

VS,J

W.P No.9034 o2f0 2205:2A3P HC:61061

3

The Court made the following Order:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

seeking the following relief:-

“…issue any writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature

of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent passed

order in proceedings No. Rc.No.K3/522/2022 dated; 20-12-2022

imposing monitor penalty 50% of the value of the seized stock (Value

of the seized is Rs.2,10, 000/-) is imposed as penalty on the vehicle

owner/petitioner to release the goods carriage vehicle bearing No

AP39-TT-7797 was seized rice through Panchanama dated; 13-10-

2022 Opp: Kia showroom at National Highway 44, Anantapur-

Bangalore Highway road, Anantapur by the respondent No.4 and

registered criminal case against the petitioner in Cr.No.240/2022 under

section 420 r/w 34 IPC, 7(1) of the E.C Act, 1955 is wholly illegal,

arbitrary, against law and principles of natural justice and

consequentially to set aside the orders passed by the 2nd respondent

and pass such other order or orders...”

2. The case of the petitioners is that:-

a) The petitioner No.1 is involved in the business of kirana store in the

name and style of M/s.Vijaya Durga Traders and in the course of his business,

he purchased a Ashok Leyland Lorry bearing registration No. AP

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