Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/5039/2026 of MADINENI MADHAVA NAIDU Vs THE STATE OF AP on 1 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 5039/2026 Between: 1. MADINENI MADHAVA NAIDU, S/O VISHWANATH NAIDU AGED 56 YEARS,
APHC010080742026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 5039/2026
Between:
1. MADINENI MADHAVA NAIDU, S/O VISHWANATH NAIDU AGED
56 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O 8/57, JANGAMPALLY, YELLANUR, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARVATI.
522237
2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR CS, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT.15516
3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, YADIKI POLICE STATION, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT.
...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 toPleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the impugned order bearing Rc.No. K6/22/2026 dt.7-2-2026 directing the petitioner to produce Bank Guarantee for an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- inspite of his readiness to furnish third party surety sought in his representation dt. 7-
1-2026, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitution al and consequently direct the respondents to release the vehicle to the petitioner herein by accepting third party surety, and to grant 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 pleased to direct the 2nd respondent herein to release the vehicle bearing Reg.No. AP-39-U- 8440 seized in FIR No. 187/2025 by accepting the third party surety for Rs. 1,50,000/- instead of the bank guarantee as mentioned in the order dt. 6-2-2026 bearing Rc.No.
K6/22/2026, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. K JOSEPH
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES
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 2nd respondent in passing the order vide Rc.No.K6/22/2026 dated 07.02.2026, directing the petitioner to produce Bank Guarantee for an amount of Rs.1,50,000/-, in spite of his readiness to furnish third party surety sought in his representation dated 07.01.2026, as illegal and arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed.
2. Heard Sri K.Joseph, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies for the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a direction may be given to the authorities to accept third-party security. He further submitted that in similar set of facts, this Court, in W.P.No.9735 of 2023, considered the very same issue and granted relief, and accordingly, prayed to pass orders in this writ petition in similar lines.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies submitted that the said judgment is squarely applicable to the facts of the case and accordingly prayed to dispose of the writ petition.
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.
“i. The respondents shall release the seized vehicle in favour of the petitioner on condition of furnishing third party immovable property security situated in the State of Andhra Pradesh to the value of the seized rice, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”
6. Accordingly, the 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: 02nd April, 2026
JLV
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 5039/2026
Date: 02nd April, 2026
JLV