Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/25132/2026 of PERAM PRAMEELA Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 20 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY, THE 21st DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 25132/2026 Between: 1. PERAM PRAMEELA, W/O P NARASIMHA RAO AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS OCC
APHC010462492026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE 21st DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 25132/2026
Between:
1. PERAM PRAMEELA, W/O P NARASIMHA RAO AGED ABOUT
49 YEARS OCC HOUSEWIFE R/O D NO 12 12 60 MAHANADU
SUNDARAIAH NAGAR TADEPALLI TOWN GUNTUR DISTRICT
522501
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT
SECRETARIAT
BUILDINGS
VELAGAPUDI
AMARAVATI
GUNTUR DISTRICT 522237
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF SPECIAL ENFORCEMENT BUREAU
CUM THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MANGALAGIRI GUNTUR
DISTRICT 522503
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, KURNOOL KURNOOL DISTRICT 518001
4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NANDYAL NANDYAL
DISTRICT 518501
5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SRISAILAM I TOWN POLICE
STATION SRISAILAM NANDYAL DISTRICT 518101
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th Respondent in passing the impugned confiscation order vide C
No 45 CO SEB NDL 2024 dated 23 07 2024 as confirmed by the 2nd Respondent vide Cr No 5271 2026 CPE J dated 13 05 2026 as illegal arbitrary unjust and violative of Articles 14 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and further direct the 4th Respondent to forthwith release the four wheeler Maruti Dzire bearing Registration No AP 39 S 0501 in favour of the Petitioner upon the Petitioner furnishing a personal bond or security for the value of the said vehicle IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned order passed by the 4th Respondent vide C No 45 CO SEB NDL 2024 dated 23 07 2024 as confirmed by the 2nd Respondent vide Cr No 5271 2026 CPE J dated 13
05 2026 and further direct the 4th Respondent to forthwith release the four wheeler Maruti Dzire bearing Registration No AP 39 S 0501 in favour of the Petitioner upon the Petitioner furnishing a personal bond or security for the value of the said vehicle Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. VEERAMANI KUKKALA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR PROHIBITION EXCISE
2. GP FOR HOME
The Court made the following:
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:
To declare the action of the 4th respondent in passing the impugned confiscation order vide C.No.45/CO/SEB/NDL/2024 dated 23.07.2024 as confirmed by the 2nd respondent vide Cr.No.5271/2026/CPE/J dated 13.05.2026, as illegal and arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed.
2. Heard Smt K.Veeramani, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Nagaraju Pullagura, learned Government Pleader for Prohibition Excise and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that similar issue as in this writ petition has already been dealt with by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in writ petitions vide W.P.No.8418 of 2024 and the same was disposed of on 12.04.2024 and the present writ petition is squarely covered by the said order and prayed to pass similar orders.
4. On the other hand, Sri Nagaraju Pullagura, learned Government Pleader for Prohibition Excise contended that the vehicle has been seized by the police authorities and the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition Excise would pass release orders wherein the police authorities will implement the same, accordingly, prayed to pass appropriate orders.
5. Taking their submissions into consideration, as a Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court has already dealt with the same issue and thereby passed orders, this Court is inclined to consider the same and dispose of the writ petition in the same lines. a. The Deputy Commissioner, Prohibition Excise, is directed to consider the case of the petitioner and pass the release orders on condition of submitting immovable security equivalent to the value of the seized vehicle as assessed by the respondent authorities concerned through the Road Transport Officials, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; b. On passing of the release orders/proceedings by the Deputy Commissioner, Prohibition Excise, the respondent authorities concerned shall release the seized vehicle of the petitioner. c. The petitioner shall not alienate or mortgage the vehicle and it has to be produced before the respondent authorities as and when it is required for enquiry pending confiscation proceedings.
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________
JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
Date: 21st September, 2026
RKS