Allowed

Eruku HariShankar v. The State of Telangana and 2 Others

Telangana HC5 Jan 2022CRLP/83/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a criminal petition filed under Section 482 CrPC to release a vehicle seized for illegal transport of jaggery. The court ordered release upon furnishing a fixed deposit of Rs. 1,00,000 and undertaking not to alienate the vehicle pending excise inquiry.

What did the court decide?

Direction to release the seized vehicle subject to the petitioner furnishing a Fixed Deposit of Rs. 1,00,000/- and an undertaking not to alienate or change its physical features.

Eruku HariShankar Vs The State of Telangana and 2 Others — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF^JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^K.LAKSHMAN

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 83 OF²⁰²²

¶6

Between:

¶7

Eruku Hari Shankar, S/o. Eruku^lvlallaiah,

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana/ Andhra^{Pradesh,Rep by its Public Prosecutor,High} Court for the State-of Telangana,^{Hyderabad throughSHOAchampetPolice} Station.

¶11

The Deputy Commissioner,^{of Prohibition and Excisedepartment' Achampet,} Ivlahbubnaoar District.

¶12

S. ifre Siatiori House Officer,^{Prohibition and Excisedepartment for the State of} Telangana'

¶13

...RES,.NDENT/..M'LAINANTS

¶14

Petition under section^{482 ol cr.P .c praying that in the circumstancesstated} in the lvlemorandum of Grounds^{of Criminal Petition, the High Courtmaybe pleased} to call for the records^{connected to the panchanamadated0810812021issued by the} 2nd respondent and^{quashthe sameproceedingsin C.O.R. No.1'1 1 of 2021daied} o8lo8l2o21 on the^{file of Achampet,Proh.and Excisestation Nagarkurnool Districtis} liable to be^quashed

¶15

l.A . NO: 1 OF 2022

¶16

Petition under section^{482 of cr.P.c praying thatin the circumstancesstated} in the Memorandum of^{Groundsof Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased} to release the vehicle^{bearing No. TS07UG6264 i.e., NlahindraBolero PIK-uP FB PS} 1.7 BSIV by stay of^{auctionin the proceedingsin c.o.R. No.111 of 2021dated} OBlOBt2O2l on the^{file of Achampet, Proh.and Excise Station Nagarkurnool Disirict} pending disposal of above Crl.P

¶17

ThisPetitioncomingonforhearing,uponperusingtheMemorandumof Grounds of criminal^{Petitionand upon hearingthe argumentsof sri.cH.VENKATA} RAMAN, Advocate^{for the Petitioner and of the Additional Public Prosecutor (TG/AP)} on behalf of the^ResPondents

¶18

The Coud made the following:^ORDER

¶19

HON BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶20

CR MINAL PETITIO N^{No.83 OF 2022}

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

The presen' Criminal Petition is^{filedunder Section- 482 of the} Code of Criminal Procedure,^{1973(lbr short'Cr.P.C.') to call tbr the} records comecte, t to the^{panchanamadated 08.08.2021 issuedby} respondent No.2 r nd quash the^{proceedingsin C'O.R, No.l1 1 of 202I} on the file of re;pondent No.3, and for^{consequentialdirection to} release the TS ITUG 6264^(Mahindra Bolero^{PIK-UP FB PS 1.7} BSIV) seized in^rre aforesaid crime. The offence^{alleged againstthe} petitioner herein is under Section - 7(A) read with 8^(e) of^the Telangana State Prohibition Act, 1995 and Section^{- 34(e)} of^the Telangana State I xcise Act, 1968.

¶23

Heard Mr. Ch. Venkat Raman, leamed cour sel for^the petitioner and lee ned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearirrg on behalf of the respondenl ;, and perused the record.

¶24

Tl-re le: :ned counsel lor the petitioner^{rvor.rldsub mit that the} petitioner is the egistered owner of the aforesaid vehicle He^would further submit th rt respondent No.3 has seized the said^vehicle on^the ground that the s rid vehicie is being used for illegal transporiation of black Jaggery. I e would subn.rit that the vehicle in dispute^{is of 2019} make and in pr, of of the same, he has filed copy of certificate^o1' registration. B' referring the same, the leamed courtsel fol the

¶25

petitioner^{would submitthat an amount of Rs'l'00'000i-could be} reasonable^{towards security deposit for releasingof the saidvehicle'}

¶26

Considering^{the fact that the petitioner has purchasedthe} said vehicle^{by obtaining finance fromthe private financierand eking} out his livelihood,^{the vehiclecan be released'subject to further} proceedings^{under the ExciseAct,on certain terms'}

¶27

The^{present Criminal Petitionis alloweddirecting} respondent^{No.2 to release the vehiclei'e'' TS OTIJG 6264 (Mahindra} Bolero PIK-UP^{FB PS l} '7^{BSIV) subject to the condition of the} petitioner furnishing^{a Fixed Deposit Receipt(FDR) for Rs' 1'00'000/-} (Rupees One^{Lakh Only) in favourof respondentNo'2'The} petitioner shall^{also furnish an Undertaking that l.re shall not alienate} or change^{the physicalfeaturesof the vehicle' Respondent No'2 shall} address to^{the Regional TransportAuthoritynot to transfer the vehicle} in favour of^{any third party without clearancefrom the Excise} Department.^{Needlessto say, release of the vehicle is subjectto the} order that^{would be. passed by respondentNo'2 Authority pursuant to} the inquiry^{to be conducted underthe provisions ofthe ExciseAct'}

¶28

As a sequel,^{miscellaneouspetitions' il any' pendingin the}

¶29

criminal^{petitionshallstand closed'}

¶30

Sd/.T.SRINIVAS ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR ,TRUE^COPY' C:V SECTION^OFFICER

¶31

-o , 1n" J'dler?r'trl9r3i?.lii'rijlilii'ff:XfE?:,|j,tfit:'X;'"j:i'jil"ii"garkurnoor 2. The^{Station House u}

¶32

"^{?fl'3ta, to the Public Prosecutor' High courtfor the state of relangana'} .^{gl:":ttSS:%rr]vunr'tRaman' Advocate (oPuc)} 5. Two^CDCopies 6. One Spare^coPY Kj

iaui.

HIGH COURT

DATED:05/01/2022

ORDER

CRLP.No.83 ot 2022

--=<br>?! l! ?022

ALLOWED.

%x-

Eruku HariShankar v. The State of Telangana and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eruku HariShankar v. The State of Telangana and 2 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

P.Yadagiri Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Goli Ajay and Another Vs The State of Telangana and Another

K. Mallesh Vs The State of Telangana and Another

Noorjahan Mohanma Hanif Sayyad Vs The State of Telangana

Kotha Janardhan Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Perumalla Naveen Kumar Vs Perumalla Tharani