This High Court disposed of a writ petition questioning the seizure of a heavy machinery vehicle. Acceding to the petitioner's request, the court closed the petition, noting that an interim order issued earlier on 26.04.2024 provided necessary relief.
Writ petition closed; no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
APHC010194102024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
[3310]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 9574/2024
Between:
Jasti Sridhar Babu
...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
The Court made the following order:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:
“…to issue an appropriate order or direction more particularly, one in the Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in seizing the petitioners Tata Hitachi Hydraulic Excavator Model EX200LCS Super Plus (Proclainer) bearing Chassis No. SP20-29607 in connection with Crime No. 113 of 2024, without following the procedure known to law as illegal, nature of irregular, ultra-virus, arbitrary, high-handed, malafide, contrary to the procedure established by law and against to the principles of natural justice and violative of fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(g) of the Constitution of India and consequentially direct the respondents to release the above vehicle along with sand forthwith in the interest of justice…”
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Home.
2
3. At the stage of admission, this Court has passed the interim
order on 26.04.2024, which reads as follows:
“Considering the submissions made, there shall be a direction to the respondents to release the Tata Hitachi Hydraulic Excavator Model EX200LCS Super Plus (Proclainer) bearing Chassis No.SP20-29607, which was seized in connection with Crime No.113 of 2024 on the file of the 4th respondent, for interim custody of the petitioner on condition of depositing Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakhs only) before the 2nd respondent within a period of one week from today. The petitioner shall also file an undertaking to the effect that he would make available the said Proclainer as and when the same is required for investigation of the 4th respondent.”
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stands closed.
Date : 08.07.2024
SPP
_______________________ DR. K.MANMADHA RAO, J.
3
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 9574 OF 2024
Date : 08.07.2024
SPP
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition filed for release of seized vehicle should be closed in light of an existing interim order.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jasti Sridhar Babu
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others
K Manmadha Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
