Allowed

Suram Ravinder v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Telangana HC4 Aug 2020WP/11653/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition seeking release of a seized TATA goods carriage. The court found the vehicle was not involved in the alleged PDS rice transportation offence and ordered its unconditional release.

What did the court decide?

The vehicle (TATA Goods Carriage No. AP-36 TA 1236) was ordered to be released unconditionally to the petitioner. Writ petition allowed without costs.

Suram Ravinder Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

Ar^{HY D E R AB AD} H r G H^{c o u Rr t.} i JSl :"131: 35 l: i'31:,-fl li

¶2

TUESDAY,^{THE FOURTHDAIgI.IYSUST} fWO^{THOUSP'ND ANDTWENTY}

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE^{SRIJUSTICECHALLA KODANDA RAM}

¶5

WRIT PET^{ITIONNO:'l 1653OF2020}

¶6

Between:

¶7

:J,[[inillt"iiry']lr'f#:f,11,*fl::-x?'#'fl"'l??'fi'3i'""'i"''"SS^:;;,]:';:';

¶8

ANO

¶9

1 The State^{of Telangana' Repby- its Principal,Secretary' ConsumerAffairs' Food} and civil Supplies^{otjp?r.i'it-Jntl'sCiretariai', Hvderabad'}

¶10

z in! E',jibitJ,.iC.-s;,^{(arimnasarDistrict at Kanmnaoar}

¶11

The Deputy^{Tahasrldar (C S)' Huzurabad' ottlce of 6CSO' Karimnagar'}

¶12

. ffl:ti'??"'i*'r':':?:|.^{of Police, Huzurabad Police station'Huzurabad'}

¶13

Karimnagar District

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under^{Article226 of the Constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the} circumstancesstatedintheaffidavitfiledtherewith'theHighCourtmaybepleasedto issue a writ^{order or directionmore particularly one in the natureof Mandamus} declaringtheactionoftherespondents2to4inSeizingTATAGoodsCarriageLMV bearing No.AP36^{TA 1236 with chassis No.MAT445056AVNB4017 in crimeNo 262} of 2019 on the^{file of Huzurabad Police Station, Karimnagar Districton the} apprehension that the^{said vehiclewill be used for transporting PDS Rice as illegal,} arbitrary and consequently^{direct the respondentsto release the TATA Goods} carriage LMV bearing^{No.AP36 TA '1236 with chassisNo.I\4AT445056AVN84017in} crime No.262 of 2019 on the file of^{Huzurabad Police station,Karimnagar District jn} favour of the petitioner.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶17

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^pleased to direct the respondents 2 to 4 to release TATA Goods Carriage LMV bearing No.AP36 TA 1236 with Chassis No.lVAT445056 AVNB4017 in Crime No.262 of 2019 on the file of Huzurabad Police Station, Karimnagar District in favour of the petitioner, pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. A. PRABHAKAR RAO

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

THE HON' B LE SRI JUsTtcE C HALLA KODANDA RAM

¶22

WRIT P ETITION No.1 165 3 ot 2020

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri B. Shankar, learned Assistant Government pleader for respondents.

¶25

It is a case where the petitioner's vehicre No.Ap-36-TA_ 1236 came to be seized under Remand Case dtary during the process of investigation on 27.06.2019. A perusal of the complaint does not disclose the involvement of the petitioner. ln the complaint it may be noted that the vehicle which was involved in the alleged offence was Ap_24_TB-3897. Though in the remand report the vehicle of the petitioner was mentioned, what all has been stated is that the AB alleged to have secured two trolleys vide bearing No.AP-t5-y-9003, Ap-15-TB-9193 and the A9 9ot secured the three trolleys bearing No.AP-15-TC-S53'1, TS-03-UB-2553 and AP-36-TA-1236.

¶26

' There is no allegation either in the complaint that the vehicle of the petitioner is involved either in transportation or storing of the alleged PDS rice in the vehicle.

¶27

It is also stated in the written statement that the vehicle AP-36-TA1236 mentioned in the affidavit is nowhere concerned in this case. Further it is submitted that as per the requisition given by the SHO, Huzurabad, the same has been seized and handed over to SHO for safe custody. ln this regard, as per the orders of this Court in W.P.No.23170 of 2019 dated 24.10.2019, the vehicle bearing No.AP-28-TB-3897 was released by obtaining Bank Guarantee.

¶28

Both in terms of the written instructions made available as well as material documents filed before this Court, it is clear that the vehicle of the petitioner AP-36-TA-1236 was not involved offence in any manner

¶29

ln those circumstances, the writ petition is allowed directing the respondents to release the vehicle AP-36-TA-1236 unconditionally to the petitioner, as long as the said vehicle is not involved in any other crime No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed

¶30

SD/-I,NAGALAKSHMI ASSISTANT REGI R ,TRUE COPY// SECTI OFFICE R

¶31

To, 1 I!^..|1'l9iqgl^{Secretary, ConsumerAffairs, Food and Civit Suppties Department,} litate^ot I elangana Secretariat. Hyderabad.

¶32

2 The Collector (C.S),, Karimnagar bistrict at Karimnaoar. 3 .l.he^{Deputy Tahasitdar (C.S)., Huzurabad,} office of dCSO, Karimnagar, Karimnagar Distrrct.

¶33

4 l!:!lr-"9_Lryeector^{of police, Huzurabad potice Station,Huzurabad,} Kaflmnagar lJistrict.

¶34

5 9n" 99^{to Sri A. prabhakar Rao} Advocate IOPUCI

¶35

1. Two ccs to the Gp for civir suppries, Higii cou[# the State of rerangana at Hyderabad. (OUT)

¶36

7 Two CD Copies

¶37

CHR 4-

HIGH COURT

DATED:04/OB12O2O

ORDER

d
,]o
t"- 2 5 AU6 2U0 >

¶42

W.P.No.11653 of 2OZO

¶43

ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶44

Suram Ravinder v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suram Ravinder v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Madadi Keshava Reddy and 18 others Vs The State of Telangana and 5 others

Tatikonda Venkatesh Vs The State of Telangana

B.M. Basavaraju Vs The State of Telangana

Dr. a. T. Raghavender Vs The State Of Telengana

P.Chinna Yadaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Banoth Padma Vs The State of Telangana and 2 Others