IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.38805 of 2025 DATE: 06.02.2026 Between:

Mr. Jangati Vijay.

...Petitioner AND The State of Telangana,, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, TS Secretariat buildings, Hyderabad and 3 others.

…Respondents

ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking following relief: “…to issue a writ, order or direction more the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of official respondents more particularly that of respondents 2 and 3 in seizing my Mahindra make XUV 500 vehicle bearing registration No.TS 08 FY 5298 on ground of drunkenness of 4th respondent, while driving the same on 10/07/2025 in terms of Traffic Violation A 8080P without even giving it to the custody of Court contrary to the orders of this Honorable Court in W.P.No.1647/2021 and batch wherein this Honorable Court has affirmatively held that the official respondents lack any power to seize vehicles in case of drunken driving as being illegal, arbitrary, Unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14, 19 and 300A and consequently direct respondents 2 and 3 to release the vehicle …”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of Mahindra XUV 500 vehicle bearing No.TS 08 FY 5298 and the said vehicle was seized by official respondents on the ground that respondent No.4 was drunk while driving the vehicle of the petitioner. He further submits that in similar circumstances, this Court has disposed of a batch of writ petitions vide W.P.No.1647 of 2021 and batch wherein a detailed order has been passed giving various directions to the Police authorities stating that official respondents lack power to seize vehicles in case of drunken driving and thus, seeks to pass appropriate orders in terms of the said order.

3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home basing on the written instructions from respondent No.3 submits that respondent No.4 is involved in four drunk and drive cases in which three cases were booked and challans were generated against the subject vehicle bearing No.TS08FY5298 and that the petitioner or respondent No.4 have not approached respondent Nos.2 & 3 with relevant documentary evidence since the date of hold of the said vehicle. He would further submit that the petitioner knowingly handed over the said vehicle to respondent No.4 and encouraged the crime. He further submits that the respondent police are implementing the order passed in W.P.No.1647 of 2021 and batch and hence, seeks to dismiss this writ petition.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is noticed that the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.1647 of 2021 and batch has passed a detailed order by considering the relevant provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the Central and the Telangana State Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 and also the Judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in P.N.Kaushal Vs. Union of India (1978 3 SCC 558) the operative portion of which reads as follows:

7. CONCLUSION:

i) This Court has previously held that under the M.V. Act, the Police

Officers do not have power to take custody of the vehicle driven under

intoxicated condition and directed the authorities / officials who have

custody of the vehicle in question to release the same on production of

certificate of registration relating to the said vehicle and on production of proof of identity and also a valid driving license.

ii) In view of the above said discussion and the relevant provisions and also considering the principle laid down by the Apex Court as well as this Court, this Court is of the considered view that the following directions are required to be issued to the Police Authorities to be followed:

a) If the driver / rider of the vehicle is found under the influence of Alcohol, he/she should not be allowed to drive the vehicle. However, if the