IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.7031 of 2026 Dated: 09.03.2026 Between:

Smt.Marimganti Sravani … Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Hyderabad, Telangana State and three others … Respondents

ORDER:

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

‘‘… to issue a Writ or Order or Direction specifically one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.3, in retaining the petitioner’s vehicle Car bearing Registration No.TG08AB8987 in the police station premises and simultaneously threatening the petitioner and her family members to settle the matrimonial dispute with her husband is illegal, mala fide, arbitrary and against the principals of natural justice. And consequently direct the Respondent No.3 to hand over the said vehicle bearing Registration No.TG08AB8987 to the petitioner, being the registered owner, in accordance with law and to pass such other order/orders …”

2. Heard Mr.S.Srinivasa Chary, learned counsel representing Mr.Kasoju Mahesh Chary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Perused the record.

3. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner and respondent No.4 are wife and husband. On the complaint made by the petitioner/de facto complainant, F.I.R.No.44 of 2026 was registered against respondent No.4 for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 316(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It is stated that the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle bearing Registration No.TG08AB8987, Chassis No.MAT627604SAA10620 and Engine No.REVTRN21 AUXK14768. It is stated that the petitioner and respondent No.4 were living separately; that when the couple lived together, both of them used the vehicle jointly. After the petitioner had left the company of respondent No.4, respondent No.4 forcibly retained the car. During the course of investigation, respondent No.3 directed respondent No.4 to bring the vehicle to the police station. Therefore, the vehicle was brought to the police station. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition seeking custody of the vehicle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.3 has retained the subject vehicle and exerting undue pressure on the petitioner and her parents by threatening that, unless she compromises and settles the matrimonial disputes with her husband, the vehicle shall not be released. Therefore, she seeks indulgence of this Court to pass appropriate orders.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, by filing the copy of written instructions dated 06.03.2026 addressed by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Yadagirigutta Police Station, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, contends that upon investigation, the vehicle was sent to the custody of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, at Yadagirigutta (for short, “the trial Court”). He contends that respondent No.3 had filed Form-60 before the trial Court on 26.02.2026 and hence, the petitioner is at liberty to file an appropriate application before the trial Court seeking release of the vehicle. Stating so, he seeks to dismiss the Writ Petition.

6. Having regard to the submissions of both the learned counsel, on perusal of the written instructions dated 06.03.2026 addressed by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Yadagirigutta Police Station, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District and relying on the decision passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Surenderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat1, this Court deems it appropriate to grant liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the trial Court as per Section 497 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (erstwhile Section 451 of Cr.P.C.), seeking release of the vehicle. On filing such application, the