Allowed

Mandela Rajesh v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Dec 2021CRLP/9611/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal petition sought direction to release the petitioner's vehicle seized under the Excise Act. The High Court allowed the petition, directing release subject to furnishing a surety and undertaking not to alienate the vehicle, pending further inquiry.

What did the court decide?

Release of vehicle bearing registration No. AP-37-TA-7279 subject to furnishing FDR of Rs. 1,00,000/- and undertaking not to alienate the vehicle.

Mandela Rajesh Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO TI-IOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITIO N NO:9611 OF 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

li4andela Rajesh, Slo lVlandela Paparao. Aged about 40^years, Occ. Agriculture, (Owner of the Vehicle bearing No AP -37 -f A-7279) R/o H No l-24, Chindadagaruvu. Amalapuram Mandal. East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh

¶8

PElITIONERlOWNER OF THE VEHIVLE BEARING^{NO,AP.37.TA"7279}

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana. Rep.esented by its^{Public Prosecutor, High Courtfor} State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

¶11

2 The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and^{Excise,Warangal Division} ...REsPoNDENrsiRESPoNDENrs

¶12

Warangal District.

¶13

...REsPoNDENrsiRESPoNDENrs

¶14

3 The Station Hosue Officer, Seerole^Police Station^{tVlahabubabadDistrict}

¶15

.RESPONDENT/ DEFACTO.COMPLAINANT

¶16

Petition under section 482 ol cr.P.c,^{praying that in the circumstancesstated} in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition, the High Courtmaybe pleased} to directing the 2nd Respondent^{forth with to release the petitioner vehicleEicher} (DCM) Goods Carriage-HMV. bearing Registration^{No AP-37-TA-7279,involvedin} FtR No 48 of 2021 of Seerole Police station.^{MahabubabadDistrict,in spite of} readiness to furnish the third^{partysuretyvalue of Rs 30,000/- before the 2nc} Respond ent.

¶17

This Petition comlng on for^{hearing.upon perusingthe Memorandum of} Grounds of crimrnal Petition^{and upon hearing the arguments of sri LAXfi/ALLA} sANDEEP, Advocate for the Petitioner^{and the Public Prosecutor (TG/AP) on behalf} of the Respondent Nos.¹ to³

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

THE HON OURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶20

CRII\ INAL PETITION No.9611 OF 2O2¹

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

This Crimir a1 Petition is filed seeking a direction to the^2nd respondent to f^,rthwith reiease the petitioner vehicle^Eicher (DCM) Goods C: rriage-HMV bearing Registration No.AP-37-TA7279 involved ir F.I.R.No.4B of 2O2l of Seerole Police Station, Mahabubabad d strict in spite of readiness of petitioner to furnish sureties.

¶23

Heard the earned counsel lor petitioner and the learned Government Plea ler for Prohibition and Excise

¶24

The case of the petitioner is that he is the registered orvner of Eicher (DCM)⁽ ioods Carriage-HMV bearing Registration No.AP37 -TA-7279 and he purchased the same from Private F inancier for his livelihood and day to day works and the same vras also used by his fa niiy members. He further submits that 3.d respondent seize Ithe said vehicle on the ground that the vehicle was carrying 55 quintals of Black Jaggery and one quintal of Alum.

¶25

Learned ct unsel for petitioner would submit that the vehicle in disputr is of the yeal. 2OI2 make. In proof of the same, copy of certificatr of registration is filed. The material seized lr,as 55 quintals of lllack Jaggery and one quintal of A1um. By referring the san e, learned counsel for petitioner rvoulcl submit

¶26

¶27

that an amount of Rs.30,000/- could be reasonable amount

¶28

towards security deposit for releasing of the vehicle.

¶29

Considering the fact that the petitioner is using the^vehicle for his livelihood and day to day works, the vehicle can^be released subject to further proceedings under the^Excise Act,^on certain terms.

¶30

The Criminal Petition is accordingly disposed of^directing the respondents to release^{petitioner's vehicleEicher (DCM)} Goods Carriage-HMV bearing Registration^{No'AP-37-TA-7279} subject to the condition of^{petitioner furnishing FixedDeposit} Receipt (FDR) for Rs.1,00,000/-^{(Rupees one lakh only) in favour} of the 2"d respondent. The^{petitioner shall also furnish an} undertaking that she will not alienate^{or changethe physical} features of the vehicie. The 2"a respondent^{sha1lwrite to the RTA} authority not to transfer the^{vehicie in favour of any third party} without clearance from the Excise Department.^{Needlessto say,} release of the vehicle is subject to the^{ordersthat shal1 be passed} by the 2"d respondent authority^{pursuant to the enquiry to be} conducted under the^{provisions of the Excise Act.}

¶31

Miscelianeous petitions^pending, if^{any, sha1l stand ciosed.}

¶32

To,

¶33

1 The Station^{House Officer' Seerole Police StationMahabubabad District'} Z The Deputy^{Commlssioner of Prohibitrorr and ExciseWarangai Division'} Waranial^District

¶34

f 2 CC's^{to the Public Prosecutor'High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUTI}

¶35

4 ONE CC^{tO SRI. LAXMALLA SANDEEP AdVOCAIEIOPUC]}

¶36

Two^CDCoPies

FIIC}H C]OLR'I

KLJ

DATED:1 611212021

ORDER

a: Z E r.rf$2li?t

CRLP.No.9611 c f 2021

¶43

Disposing of the Criminal Pt .it:on

¶44

Mandela Rajesh v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mandela Rajesh v. The State of Telangana

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

G.G.Suresh Kumar Vs State of Telangana

Dr.a.Yogender Swamy Vs The State of Telangana and Another

Avinash Melwani and another Vs The State of Telangana and another

Bendra Thirupathi Reddy Vs State of Telangana

Sama Sanjeev Reddy and 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana and Another

Mr. Bala Reddy Gopu Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Tds