Allowed

Ramachandra Nayak, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC25 Mar 2024WP/3973/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of writ petition regarding interim custody of seized Bolero vehicle by following a coordinate bench order and directed respondent to release vehicle against immovable security within one week.

What did the court decide?

Respondent directed to consider representations and release seized Bolero vehicle against immovable security within one week; no order as to costs.

Ramachandra Nayak, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

APHC010071282024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

[3327]

¶5

TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 3973/2024

¶8

Between: Ramachandra Nayak,

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶12

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶13

1.P NARASIMHULU

¶14

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶15

1.GP FOR HOME (AP)

¶16

The Court made the following:

¶17

¶18

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SREENIVASA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3973 of 2024

¶19

ORDER:-

¶20

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief.

¶21

“…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 not granting interim custody of the vehicle i.e. Bolero goods vehicle vide Registration No. AP 39 TU 7384, which was seized by the Respondent No.3 in Crime No. 35/2023 of Somandepalli Police Station of Sri Satya Sai District as unjust, illegal, arbitrary, violation of Principles of Natural Justice and violation of Articles 14, 1,9 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and also contrary to the provision of A P Excise Act and pass …”

¶22

non-consideration of his representations dated 10.3.2023, 05.5.2023, 07.8.2023, 09.12.2023 and 12.1.2024 for interim release of the seized vehicle i.e. Bolero Goods Vehicle bearing Registration No.AP 39 TU 7384 of the petitioner in connection with Crime No.35 of 2023 registered by the respondent No.3.

¶23

¶24

Heard both sides.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order dated 01.03.2023 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.5032 of 2023 and prayed to pass a similar order in this Writ Petition also.

¶26

To the said submission, learned counsel for the respondents reported no objection.

¶27

Taking into consideration the submissions of both the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents, for the reasons alike in the aforesaid order, this Writ Petition is also disposed of, in terms of the order dated 01.03.2023 in W.P. No.5032 of 2023.

¶28

Accordingly, the respondent No.2 is directed to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 10.3.2023, 05.5.2023, 07.8.2023, 09.12.2023 and 12.1.2024 and release the seized vehicle in favor of the petitioner on condition of submitting immovable security equivalent to the value of the seized vehicle as assessed by the respondent No.2 through the Road Transport Officials,

¶29

¶30

within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and 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.

¶31

There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the writ petition, shall also stand closed.

¶32

__________________________________ JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

¶33

Dated: 26.3.2024 GR

¶34

¶35

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SREENIVASA REDDY

¶36

WRIT PETITION No.3973 of 2024

¶37

Dated: 26.3.2024 GR

Ramachandra Nayak, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramachandra Nayak, 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravipati Madhuri Devi Vs Ravipati Surendra

Atla Chandra Kala Vs Atla Emmanuel Reddy

Nakkala Ramu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Sanjay Dhawan Vs State

Kalahasti Vasudevamurthy Vs The State of A.P.

Basam Manjunath Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh