Disposed

EerlaBiksham v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC30 Jan 2025WP/2589/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Vehicle seized by police in an essential commodities case was ordered released to owner on furnishing a bank guarantee fixed deposit of Rs.25,000, subject to outcome of pending Section 6-A confiscation proceedings, with conditions against alienation or alteration.

What did the court decide?

Release of vehicle AP 16 TH 6866 on furnishing Rs.25,000 FD bank guarantee, subject to confiscation proceedings under Section 6-A EC Act.

EerlaBiksham Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^321s ]

¶2

I I I

¶3

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: ?589 OF 2025

¶8

Between:

¶9

EerlaBiksham, S/O Eerla VenkaEh,-Aged 46 years, Occ. Business Bearing No. AP 16 TH 6866^- Ryo-- H.tto.s-rZl,^--Kahu;r: Kuravimandal,Gundrathimadugu, Mahabubabad, Telangana, sOb 1O 1

¶10

AND

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

1 . The State.of .Telangana, rep by its prl. Secretary, Civil Supplies Department Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶13

1. The AddlCollector, (Civil Supplies) SuryapetDistrict at Suryapet 3. The District Civit Suppty Officer, Surya6eiDistrict 4. The Tahsildar, (Civil Suppties)- 0/o. District Civit Suppty Officer, SuryapetDistrict

¶14

The Station House officer, THIRUMALAGIRI police station, suryapetDistrict

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 ol the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased topleased sue a writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent in seizing the petitioner vehicle without informing is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-4 of constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release the petitioner vehicle bearing No. AP 16 TH 6866, Eicher-Goods carriage-HMV vehicle immediately, in the interest of justice

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 202s

¶18

Petition under sectron^{151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition'the HighCourt may be pleasedto} Direct the Respondents^{to releasethe petitioner vehicle bearing No. AP 16 TH} 6866 Eicher-Goods^{carriage-HMVvehicle, pendingdisposal of the above writ} petition

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRl. CHATLA MADHU}

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos. 1to4: GP FORCIVIL SUPPLIES}

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.5: GP FOR HOME}

¶22

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶23

€

¶24

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI -

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.2589 of 2o.25 .

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This writ petition is filed to declare the seizure of the petitioner's vehicle i.e., Eicher Goods Carriage HMV bearing No.AP 16 TH 6866 (Telangana Registration) under the cover of palchanama dated 73.01.2025 in connection with Crime No.12 of 2025 of Thirumalgiri Police Station, Suryapet District, as arbitrar5r and unconstitutional.

¶28

2 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 and learned Government Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondent No,5.

¶29

J The vehicle of the petitioner i.e., Eicher Goods Carriage HMV bearing No.AP 16 TH 6866 was seized under the cover of panchanama dated 13.01.2025 by respondent No.5 in connection with Crime No.12 of 2025 of

¶30

wP_2589_2025TMDJ )

¶31

¶32

Thirumalgiri Police Station, Suryapet District, under Section 318 (4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS') and Section 7 of the Essentia-l^tSommodities Act, 1955 (for shortthe E.C. Act').

¶33

4 Learned Government Pleader for Civil Supphes submitted that proceedings under Section 6-l\ of the E.C. Act, have been initiated against the petitioner and the sarne are pending. Learned Government Pleader further submitted that the subject vehicle is still in ttLe custody of respondent No. S-Police Station

¶34

5 In view of the above facts and circumstances, taking into consideration the fact that the respondent authorities have initiated proceedings under tSection 6- A of the E.C. Act and the sarne are pending, this Court is inclined to grant relief to the petitioner.

¶35

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.5 to release the vehicle i.e., Eicher Goods Carriage HMV bearing No.AP 16 TH 6866,

TMD,J wP 2549 )O25

(

under the cover of panchanama dated 13.01.2025 in 1 connection with Crime No.12 of 2025 of Thirumalgir Police Station, Suryapet District, in favour of the petitioner subject to condition of his furnishing bank guarantee by way of Fixed Deposit for a sum of Rs.25,OOO/- (Rupees Twent5r Five Thousand only) in favour of respondent No.2. Reiease of the vehicle shall be subject to outcome of the confiscation proceedings under Section 6-4 of the trC Act. Pending such proceedings, the petitioner is directed not to alienate or alter physical features of the subject vehicle, and is further directed to produce the vehicle as and when required by the authorities concerned. No order as to costs.

¶40

Miscellaneous applications, if aly, pending in this

¶41

writ petition, shall stand closed.

¶42

SDh L. LAKSHMI^BABU t SI TANT^REGISTRAR //TRUE^COPY// ' SECTION^OFFICER rtment^Secretariat, To, 1. The Principal^{Secretary' Civil SuppliesDepa} 2. 3. ift 5{qf"iF.,ilrufiJl;l3ti.B'i:l*?H"3js,**lJ::l'"'f^{'"J,,,,,orrcer} 4. The Tahsildar,^(Crvrl 6 7 i[:-J",1'#:sI"+:'i.$fr'{t:$"?EE#"';',T::T:"'JJ:'":' I iflsl8u",t^{?3"138 rs^YI]}'nt' court ror the state or reransana'at HY.derabad^[OUI d 'k

HIGH COURT

DATED:3010112025

(

ORDER

WP.No.2589 of 2025

f?;Fffi,;1r.,
t
J
[ 3 APR 2025
t 3es.\-- :\TC qf.rJ

¶50

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

EerlaBiksham v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

EerlaBiksham 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

M/s. Vaishnavi Biologicals Private Limited Vs State of Telangana

M/s. Sri Rama Traders Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Abdul Hameed, Vs State of Telangana

Gasiganti Vikas babu Vs The State of Telangana

Kadaverugu Yadagiri Vs The State of Telangana

Edula Mallesh Vs The State of Telangana