Vehicles seized during criminal investigations should be released to the owner on interim custody subject to reasonable security and conditions to prevent the vehicle from deteriorating while lying unused in police custody.

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 action of the Respondents in not releasing the petitioner vehicle bearing No.AP 29 TB 5123 Goods carriage TATA MOTORS LIMITED, HMV in connection with Cr.No.110/2026 dt.10.04.2026 on the file of 4th respondent registered for the offence U/s.34E of Telangana Excise Act, section 7A, r/w 8(E) of Prohibition Act, Which is illegal, arbitrary and improper under articles 14, 19 of Constitution of India and pass such other order or orders …”

2. Heard Mr.Praveen Kumar Veerjala, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr.M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent No.4. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of the Vehicle bearing No.AP 29 TB 5123 Good Carriage TATA MOTORS LIMITED, HMV; that respondent No.4 seized the said Vehicle in Crime No.110 of 2026 dated 10.04.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 7(A) r/w 8(E) of the Telangana Prohibition Act, 1995 & Section 34(E) of the Telangana Excise Act, 1968. He further contends that the petitioner is not arrayed as accused for the alleged offences and the continued seizure of the Vehicle is causing hardship and severe financial loss to the petitioner. He states that if the Vehicle is exposed to sun and rain, it is put to deterioration day-by-day.

4. He further states that Jaggery and Alum are not prohibited commodities under law and their transportation does not constitute an offence; that mere possession or transport of such goods cannot attract the provisions of the Telangana Prohibition Act, 1995. Relying on the order dated 25.03.2026 in W.P.No.8876 of 2026, he seeks 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 Rajasthan ¹2017 Law Suit (Raj.) 2379, Kishore Kumar Choudhury v. State of Orissa , 2017 Law Suit (Ori.) 240 and Waish Ahmed v. State of West Bengal³2017 Law Suit (Cal.) 22, 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 Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat , (2002) 10 SCC 283 and Bishwajit Dey Vs. The State of Assam ⁵CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 87 OF 2025 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.)No.13370 of 2024), 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 petitioner’s Vehicle bearing No.AP 29 TB 5123 Good Carriage TATA MOTORS LIMITED, HMV seized in Crime No.110 of 2026 dated 10.04.2026, 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.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only) the satisfaction of respondent No.3/Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Mahabubabad, Mahabubabad Distrcit.

(ii) The petitioner shall deposit t