IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.7923 of 2026 Dated: 16.03.2026 Between:

Ganesh Rodda … Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and two others … Respondents

ORDER:

The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief/s:-

‘‘… to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the in action of the 2nd respondent to release the Petitioner’s Vehicle Bearing No.TS 18 T 3812 in COR No. 629/2025 dated 23.12.2025 seized of petitioner’s vehicle was being illegal, arbitrary and unjust also Article 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to release of the vehicle to the petitioner forthwith, and pass such other order or orders …”

2. Heard Mr.Laxmaiah Kanchani, learned counsel for the petitioner and M.Arun Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition & Excise appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of the Auto Rickshaw Piaggio Vehicle bearing No.TS 18 T 18 3812, having purchased the same by availing loan from private finance; that the petitioner was eking out his livelihood from the outcome of the income derived from the said vehicle. He states that the driver of the vehicle took the vehicle for personal use; that at the time respondent No.3 was performing patrolling duty along with his staff and found that the subject Vehicle was carrying liquor bottles. Therefore, respondent No.3 registered Crime No.176 of 2025 which was subsequently, registered as C.O.R.No.629 of 2025 dated 23.12.2025 by respondent No.2. Further, respondent No.3 seized 69.12 litres of liquor along with the subject Vehicle.

4. He further states that the petitioner is no way connected with the alleged offence and if the subject Vehicle is not released, it would cause undue hardship and irreparable loss to the petitioner. He further states that if the Vehicle is exposed to air, sun and rain, there is every possibility of the Vehicle getting damaged. Relying on the order dated 27.10.2021 passed by this Court in W.P.No.26865 of 2021, he seeks for the indulgence of this Court to grant interim custody of the subject Vehicle.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise opposes the same.

6. Having regard to the submissions of both the learned counsel, on perusal of the material available on record and relying on the decisions reported in Jagtar Singh, Son of Dhyan Singh v. State of Rajasthan1, Kishore Kumar Choudhury v. State of Orissa, 2017 Law Suit (Ori.) 240 and Waish Ahmed v. State of West Bengal3, wherein the High Courts of Rajasthan, Orissa and Calcutta, released the seized vehicles, on certain terms and conditions and the decisions passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Surenderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat4 and Bishwajit Dey

1 2017 Law Suit (Raj.) 2379

3 2017 Law Suit (Cal.) 22

4 (2002) 10 SCC 283

Vs. The State of Assam⁵, wherein it has been laid down that in case of the vehicle seized during investigation, it should not be allowed to deteriorate by keeping it unused and unattended in the premises of the Police Station. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the subject Vehicle shall be entrusted to the petitioner for interim custody subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall furnish security in the form of Fixed Deposit Receipt for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) the satisfaction of respondent No.2.

(ii) The petitioner shall deposit the original Registration Certificate of the Vehicle in the Court. However, respondent No.2 shall issue a certified copy of the registration certificate to the petitioner so that no inconvenience is caused to him