Dismissed

Alluru Venkata Subba Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC19 Jan 2023WP/1100/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the illegal seizure of a petitioner's tractor. Relying on a prior order in W.P.No.34800 of 2022, the court disposed of the petition without costs and closed any pending miscellaneous petitions.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of by following the order in W.P.No.34800 of 2022 dated 28.10.2022. No costs to the petitioners. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, stood closed.

Alluru Venkata Subba Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Andhra Pradesh HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION No. 1100 OF 2023

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology for the 3^rd respondent and the learned Government Pleader for Home for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶4

The grievance of the writ petitioner is that the 2^nd respondent seized the Tractor bearing Nos. A.P 39 TM 0532 of the petitioner, without following the due procedure.

¶5

The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is using the said vehicle for transporting the sand. While so, on 29.12.2022, the 2^nd respondent seized the above said vehicle and registered a case in Crime No.222 of 2022 under Sections 379 IPC and 21(4) MMDARA, which is contrary to the G.O.Ms.No.71, dated 04.09.2019.

¶6

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the seized vehicle bearing number is wrongly printed in the FIR as AP TZ 0532, but the actual tractor bearing number is AP 39 TM 0532

¶7

The counsel for the petitioner further submits that, at best the respondent authority can impose the penalty under Clause 16 of G.O.Ms.No.71, dated 04.09.2019, instead of that, the 2^nd

¶8

¶9

respondent falsely registered a Criminal Case which is not warranted in the facts and circumstances.

¶10

On the other hand, the counsel for the respondents submits that the seized vehicle of the petitioner would be dealt with by following the due procedure by the respondents and interim custody of the same would be considered as per law.

¶11

However, both the counsels submit that the issue involved herein is similar and identical to the issue involved in W.P.No.34800 of 2022 and that the subject is squarely covered by the order of this Court in W.P.No.34800 of 2022 dated 28.10.2022.

¶12

Accordingly, following the order in W.P.No.34800 of 2022 dated 28.10.2022, this writ petition is also disposed of. No costs.

¶13

Office is directed to append the copy of the order passed in W.P.No.34800 of 2022 dated 28.10.2022, to this order.

¶14

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶15

_______________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶16

19.01.2023 KMS

¶17

¶18

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

¶19

WRIT PETITION No. 1100 OF 2023

¶20

19.01.2023

¶21

K M S

Alluru Venkata Subba Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alluru Venkata Subba Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sriramula Venkata Ramanamurthy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Patta Venu Babu Vs the State of Ap

N.Venkateswaramma, Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Singampalli Siva Rama Krishna Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Varanasi Surya Prakash Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Singampalli Siva Rama Krishna Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh