Telangana High Court
WP/29251/2025 of DHIDIGAM MANOJ KUMAR Vs The State of Telangana on 23 September 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYOERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION NO:29251 0F 2025 Between: AND
[ 3168 J
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYOERABAD
(SPecial Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION NO:29251 0F 2025
Between:
AND
DHIDIGAMMANOJKUMAR,S/o.Venkatesham,A99932years'Occ-Kirana 5nop, nfo.naravaram, Akkanapet Mandal, Siddipet District'
...PETITIONER
1. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Excise Department'
Secretariat, HYderabad
Z ihe ffl:JnJit f'xecutive, Magistrate, Akkannapet Mandal, Siddip_et District.
5. iii; '$n6n-H-ouse bnictr, Husnabad prohibition AND Excise station, Siddipet District.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court ma-y -be pteasedtoissueanorderordirectionmoreparticularlyoneinthenatureofWrit ofMandamus,declaringtheactionofthe2ndrespondentinissuingthe ;p;g;;J
Proceeding M.C.No.490/2025 dated 17 09 2025 directing the p"iitl6n"t herein to pay a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 within (7) days as being illegal'
arbitrary and in vioiation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently set aside the same lA NO: 1 OF 2025
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 ple-a-s.ed to trrnt SfnV of all further proceeding in lmpugned Proceeding MC No 490/2025
iated 17.09.2025 issued 6y the 2nd respondent, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. RAMULU PASUPULA
iounsel for the Respondents No.1 and 2: AGp FOR pROHtBlloN ExctsE
Counsel for the Respondent No.3: GP FOR HOME
The Court made the following: ORDER
a
HON'BLE SRI JUSTTCE K. LAKSII IIAN
WRIT PETITION No.29251 OF ::025
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.
ORAL ORDER:
Heard leamed counsel for the petitior t:: and learned Assistant Government Pleader for prohibition an, lxcise
2. Petitioner filed the present writ petition r:hallenging the notice dated 17.09.2025 in M.C.No.490 of 202 i of respondent No.2 directing the petitioner to pay penalty of t;.1,00,000/_ or show cause within seven (7) days from the date rl'receipt of the notice that why he shouid not be adjudged for im r:isonment until such bond period expires, as illegal.
3. Leamed Assistant Government pleader for {:,rohibition and Excise. on instructions, would submit that the [)etitioner was involved in COR No. 164 of 2025, dated 24.05.2 i.,4 pending on the file of Prohibition and Excise Station, Husnr bad, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 34(a) a rrl 34(e) of the Telangana Excise Act, 1968. The allegation again.l him is illegal transportation o1'ID liquor. He was also invorve r in two other -'l crimes of the very same police Station vide COR No. 107 of 2025, dated 06.08.2025 and COR No.151 of 2025, dated 15.09.2025 for the offences under Section 7(A) read with Secrion 8(e) of the Telangana State Prohibition Act, 1995 and Section 34(e) of the Telangana Excise Act, 1968 respectively and allegations are also same. + While so, on 11 .09.2025 notice for forfeiture of bond of good behavior was issued by respondent No.2 alleging that petitioner committed breach of bond by involving in an offence. The basis ofthe said notice is letter addressed by respondent No.3 informing involvement of petitioner in other crimes
From the reading of the impugned notice, it is seen that no prior opportunity was given to the petitioner to explain his stand before ordering forfeiture of the amount furnished by him earlier That apart, the reason assigned for forfeiture is alleged involvement of the petitioner in two crimes. Mere involvement in a crime would not by itself constitute breach of bond fumished by the petitioner, as it cannot be treated on par with conviction. I
Thus, on both counts i.e., on facts and in lar'. the impugned notice dated 17.09.2025 is unsustainable. Henc:. the impugned notice is liable to be set aside.
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed ;r:tting aside the impugned notice, dated 17.09.2025 issued by ;:r;pondent No.2. However, it is made clear that this order would not preclude the authorities in proceeding with the matter in futt,rt: in accordance with law, if warrants. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if an ', pending in the writ petition shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/ A. SRINIVASA REDDY AI!SISTANT REGISTRAR t\\:l |..--: l \, s'rctroru oFFrcER i To,
1. The Principal Secretary, Excise Department, Secretar rt, T.S.,Hyderabad
2. The Mandal Executive, Ivlagistrate, Akkannapet Mand, l, Siddipet District.
3. The Station House Officer, Husnabad Prohibition ANC t:xcise Station, Siddipet District.
4. One CC to SRl. RAIVULU PASUPULA, Advocate IOF -13]
5. Two CCs to GP FOR PROHIBITION EXCISE ,High C r.rrt for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]
6. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME ,High Court for the State r'Telangana at Hyderabad [OL,|T]
7. Two CD Copies N/ BM BS ,_--,*_;;*.*, -"t
HIGH COURT DATED:2310912025
ORDER
'iri il 2t]Zs 'i--j- - , '\:i-- WP.No.29251 ot 2025 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITI.II]UT COSTS ) tC ,,,/ I