Telangana High Court
WP/47594/2018 of Sri Gummadi Raj Kumar, Vs The State of Telangana, on 28 December 2018
C. PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 47594 of 2018 ORDER: The present writ petition came to be filed seeking issuance of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in not releasing the petitioner’s vehicle Maruti Swift Desire VDI bearing Registration No. TS 02 EF1111
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The present writ petition came to be filed seeking issuance of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in not releasing the petitioner’s vehicle Maruti Swift Desire VDI bearing Registration No. TS 02 EF1111 seized in COR No. 84/ 2018 on the file of the 3[rd] respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and improper.
2. The averments made in the writ affidavit would show that the 3[rd] respondent seized the above said vehicle together with jaggery, under a cover of panchanama on a premise that the jaggery powder is being used for preparation of I.D. liquor. A case in COR No.84 of 2018, on the file of the 3[rd] respondent, was registered on 05.12.2018. It is stated that there is no prohibition for sale, purchase and transportation of jaggery powder nor its movement is regulated under any law and no licence is required for possession and to carry on business in jaggery.
3. The learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise, would submit that the authorities are entitled to seize the said jaggery, if it is found to be used in making I.D. liquor and that no reason or explanation are forthcoming as to why the petitioner is transporting such a huge quantity of jaggery. He further submits that both the vehicle and the jaggery are liable for confiscation.
4. It is to be noted that the confiscation proceedings are pending before the 2[nd] respondent. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and in view of the fact that the proceedings are pending before the 2[nd] respondent and since the vehicle and jaggery are kept idle and if exposed to sun and rain, the same are likely to get damaged, this Court is of the view that it would be just and proper to direct the authority to release the vehicle along with the seized goods on certain conditions.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2[nd]respondent to release the vehicle bearing No. TS 02 EF 1111 which is in his custody, on condition of the petitioner furnishing a Fixed Deposit Receipt issued by a Nationalised Bank for Rs.1,50,000/ - (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) in favour of the 2[nd]respondent. The petitioner shall also give an undertaking that he will not alienate the vehicle, will not create any third party rights, will not remove major parts of the vehicle and that the vehicle will be produced as and when required during the course of proceedings. Insofar as jaggery is concerned, the petitioner is directed to make an appropriate application before the 2[nd]respondent-Deputy Commissioner of Prohibiton and Excise, enclosing thereto a fixed deposit receipt issued by a Nationalised Bank for Rs.2,20,110/ - (Rupees two lakhs twenty thousand one hundred and ten only) drawn in favour of the 2[nd] respondent, and on such application being made by the petitioner, the subject stock aforestated shall be given to the interim custody of the petitioner. It is also made clear that this order holds good till the conclusion of the proceedings/ prosecution. Thereafter, it is open for the respondents herein to proceed in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
6. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
_________________________ JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
28.12.2018 Note: Issue cc by 30.12.2018 DMG