The appropriate legal remedy for the release of seized cash and vehicles is to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate by filing applications under the relevant provisions of the Cr.P.C. or BNSS.

The Court made the following:

ORDER

The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“… to issue an appropriate Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in registering FIR No 32/2026 dated 07 04 2026 at Gundala Police Station under Section 106 BNSS as illegal arbitrary without jurisdiction and authority of law and in violation of Articles 14 191g 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently quash the same and also direct the 3rd Respondent to forthwith release and hand over the seized cash amount of Rs 2 00 00 000/ and the vehicle bearing Registration No AP39SS2597 to the Petitioners without insisting on any conditions in the interest of justice…”

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader.

3. Sri D.Taraka Prasad, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the impugned action of the Respondents in intercepting the Petitioner’s vehicle bearing No.AP39SS2597 on 07.04.2026 near HCG Cancer Hospital, BRTS Road, Vijayawada, and seizing therefrom a sum of Rs.2,00,00,000/ along with the said vehicle, is wholly arbitrary, unconstitutional, and deho‑rs the authority of law. It is submitted that the Petitioner, a bona fide fruit trader originally hailing from Gujarat and presently engaged in seasonal mango trading in and around Vijayawada, was carrying the said amount as part of legitimate agricultural business transactions, the funds having been advanced by several farmers and agriculturists for booking mango orchards and crop procurement, which is a customary practice in the trade. The seizure was affected merely on suspicion, without any enquiry, verification of documents, or opportunity afforded to explain the lawful source of the money, and without discovery of any contraband or incriminating material. The Respondents, in registering F.I.R.No.32/2026 under Section 106 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), have acted in excess of jurisdiction, for Section 106 of ‘the BNSS’ is purely procedural and cannot constitute a substantive offence to justify registration of a criminal case. The FIR discloses no victim, no complaint, no predicate offence, and no cogent reason for suspicion, thereby rendering the entire exercise ultra vires. Mere possession of cash, absent any illegal activity, does not constitute an offence, and the continued retention of the Petitioner’s money and vehicle gravely impairs his right to carry on trade under Article 19(1)(g), his right to property under Article 300 A, and his fundamental guarantees under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitutio‑n of India. The arbitrary seizure, bereft of due process, has disrupted the Petitioner’s seasonal business, prejudiced the farmers awaiting payments, and inflicted irreparable hardship. In these circumstances, it is urged that this Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.3 in registering FIR No.32/2026 dated 07.04.2026 under Section 106 of ‘the BNSS’ as illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction, quash the same, and direct forthwith release of the seized cash amount of Rs.2,00,00,000/ and the vehicle bearing Registration No.AP39SS2597 to the Petition‑er, without imposing any onerous conditions.

4. Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that the Petitioners’ allegations are wholly untenable, for the Respondent Police acted strictly within the bounds of law and procedure upon receipt of credible inform