Allowed

Chokka Babuji, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC18 Mar 2021WP/6202/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a writ petition challenging a direction to deposit Rs. 1,50,000 as fixed deposit for interim custody of a seized auto vehicle. The High Court set aside the fixed deposit requirement and directed the release of the vehicle against collateral security or immovable property security.

What did the court decide?

The Fixed Deposit condition is set aside. The auto vehicle is to be released for interim custody against collateral security or immovable property security.

Chokka Babuji, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D. RAMESH

¶2

WRIT PETITON No.6202 of 2021

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of

¶5

India, seeking the following relief:

¶6

“ to issue Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the proceedings C.No.145/SP-VSP-Dist/2020, dated 08.01.2021 directing the petitioner to deposit Fixed Deposit of Rs. 1,50,000/- for release of Auto bearing No.AP 39 TH 1994 for interim custody, which is seized in Crime No. 631 of 2020 of Payakaraopet Police Station, Visakhapatnam District, is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 19(1)(g) and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to grant interim custody of the vehicle to the petitioner.”

¶7

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleaders for Prohibition & Excise and Home, appearing for the respondents.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the 2^nd respondent has issued Proceedings vide C.No.145/SP-VSP-Dist/2020, dated 08.01.2021 d irected the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh and fifty thousand only) by way of Fixed Deposit towards security deposit in the name of the 2^nd respondent to release the seized vehicle i.e., Auto vehicle bearing Registration No. AP 39 TH 1994 to be given to the petitioner on interim custody which was seized by the 3^rd respondent in connection with Crime No.631 of 2020, dated 08.11.2020. Aggrieved by the condition that the petitioner has to furnish the Fixed Deposit Receipt as interim custody of the subject vehicle, the present petition is filed.

¶9

¶10

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no dispute about the ownership of the vehicle and the condition imposed to furnish a fixed deposit receipt towards the value of the vehicle is an onerous condition and the petitioner is not in a position to furnish the same, and prayed to relax the condition.

¶11

Learned Assistant Government Pleaders for Prohibition

¶12

& Excise and Home do not oppose the Writ Petition.

¶13

In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is allowed and the condition imposed in the impugned proceedings of the 2^nd respondent insofar as submitting the Fixed Deposit Receipt is set aside and the respondents are directed to release the vehicle i.e., Auto, bearing Registration No . AP 39 TH 1994 , for interim custody of the petitioner by taking collateral security/ immovable property security for the value of the said vehicle from the petitioner.

¶14

It is further directed that the petitioner shall not alienate the vehicle, or change its physical features. The petitioner shall produce the vehicle whenever he is directed to do so by the concerned authorities. No order as to costs.

¶15

Consequently, miscellaneous application, if any, shall stand closed.

¶16

_____________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH

¶17

Date: 18 -03-2021 KK

¶18

¶19

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH

¶20

WRIT PETITON No.6202 of 2021

¶21

Date: 18-03-2021

¶22

Chokka Babuji, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chokka Babuji, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T Ramachandrappa Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Lakshmi Sai Enterprises, Vs The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise

Ramoju Satyavati, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s.Vennapusa Reddy Gari Cements Private Limited Vs Sri. Gopala Krishna Dwivedi

P. Naga Subba Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Rotte Rama Krishna Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh. Rep. by its Principal Secretary.