JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by the seizure of his vehicle, a Hitachi Excavator, which has been parked on the side of a road, on the allegation that the same has been utilized for loading earth in a lorry, which was also seized. It is the contention of the petitioner that the mahasar would not disclose the offence alleged against the petitioner by utilizing his vehicles, nor is the purpose of the seizure decipherable from the mahasar. In fact, the mahasar would only indicate that the vehicle was parked on the side of a road, which is at some distance from the place where the lorry has been seized. There is no allegation of any construction, extraction, preparation, or use of the vehicle for any purpose in the area. Supporting to the learned counsel, the vehicle is liable to be released by following the course adopted in Unais vs. District Collector [ 2023 (1) KLT 651 ], which has been c