Disposed

Bad Hiren @ Bad Hiren Ajitbhai v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC24 Oct 2025WP/31969/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging the seizure of a vehicle under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Court directed release of the vehicle subject to furnishing a bank guarantee of Rs.50,000 and an undertaking not to alienate the vehicle, pending outcome of confiscation proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Vehicle released subject to furnishing a bank guarantee of Rs.50,000 and an undertaking not to alienate the vehicle.

Bad Hiren @ Bad Hiren Ajitbhai Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁰⁰¹

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 31969 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Bati Hiren @ Bati Hiren Ajitbhai, Sio. AjitBhai, Age. 30 Years, Occ. Owner of Vehicle No. GJ 03 BV 2177, R/o. Pithad Krupa, Krushna Nagar, Street No.1, Near Rajeshri Bajaj Auto, Gondal Road, Rajkot, Gujarat.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Collector (CS), Sangareddy District , Sangareddy Proper and District.

¶13

The Station House Officer, Kalher Police Station, Kalher Proper and^Mandal, Sangareddy District.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 oI lhe Constitution of lndia^praying that^{in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^{High Court maybe} pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action^{of the respondents} authorities in seizing the vehicle i.e., GJ 03 BV 2177, by registering^{a F.l.R. No.} 103 of 2025, dated 10-10-2025 and not releasing the said vehicle^{in favour of the} petitioner, even though the petitioner had not committed any irregularities or illegalities, is nothing but arbitrary, illegal, null and^void and^{violative of principles} of natural^justice and also violative of Articles 14, 19 and^{21 of the Constitutionof} lndia, the same maybe set aside. Consequently, direct the^respondents authorities to release the vehicle i.e., GJ 03 BV^{2177 in favour of the petitioner,} which is seized by registering a F.l.R. No. 103 of^{2025, dated 10-10-2025,}

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Courl may be^pleased to direct the respondents authorities to release the vehicle i.e.. GJ 03 BY 2177 in favour of the petitioner, which is seized by registering a F,l.R. No. 103 of 2025, dated 10-10-2025,

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI K VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

¶19

Counsel forthe Respondent No.3: GP FOR HOME

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

¶22

THE HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICENAGESH BHEEMAPAKA}

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.31969^of 2o25

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This Writ Petition is filed declaring^{the inaction of the} respondent authorities^{in seizingthe petitioner'svehicle i.e., GJ} 03 BV 2177, by registering a^{FIR No.1O3 of 2025,dated} lO. 10.2025, as arbitrary^{and unconstitutional.}

¶26

Heard Ms. K.Venu Madhav,^{learned counselforthe} petitioner; learned Government^{Pleaderfor Civil Supplies,for} respondent Nos.1 and^{2and learned Government Pleader for} Home, for respondent^{No.3. Perusedthe record.}

¶27

karned counsel for the^{petitionersubmits thatthe} petitioner is only seeking^{release of the vehiclebearing No' GJ} 03 BV 2177 sublect to^{the outcome of the proceedingsinitiated} against him under^{Section6-,{ of the EssentialCommoditiesAct'} He also submitted that^{in similar matter i.e., W P'No'31I 10 of} 2025, dated 14.1O.2025,^{this Court haddirected the} respondents to^{release the vehiciesubject to certainconditions'} A copy of the same^{is filedalong with this Writ Petition'}

¶28

Learned Government Pleader for Civil Suppiies as well as learned Government Pleader for Home has not disputed^the submission made by the learned counsel lor the^pe titioner.

¶29

In view of the above submissions, this rvrit petition 1S disposed of directing respondents to release the vehicle^bearing No.GJ 03 BV 2177 subject to the petitioner furnishing bank guarantee by way of fixed deposit for a sum of Rs.50,000/(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) in favour of respondent No.2- The Collector (CS), Sangareddy District, and als,o furnishing undertaking that he will not alienate the subject vehicle or alter its nature or create any encumbrance on it. The reiease of the vehicle shall be subject to the outcome of the confiscation proceedings uncier Section 6-A of the Essential Corrmodities Act, 1955. There sha1l be no order as to costs.

¶30

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ

¶31

petition, shall stand closed.

¶32

SD/,.P.PONNA KRISHNA AqSISTANT REGISTRAR f, \

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Principal Secretary Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies, Secretariat Buildings, The State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶37

The Collector (CS), Sangareddy Drstrict , Sangareddy^{Prooer and District.}

¶38

The Station House Officer, Kalher Police^{Station,Kalher ProperandMandal,} Sangareddy District.

¶39

One CC to SRI K VENUIVADHAV Advocate IOPUC]

¶40

5 Two CCs to GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, High Court for rhe Srate of

¶41

Telangana. [OUT]

¶42

6 Two CCs to GP FOR HONE, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

¶43

7 Two CD Copies

PVI-^{( ft}

TKS

HIGH COURT

DATED:2411012025

ORDER

WP.No.31969 of 2025

,./,
':.\ )/ ..,1
.'
:;.-

¶52

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶53

fA-

¶54

3t^lou

Bad Hiren @ Bad Hiren Ajitbhai v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bad Hiren @ Bad Hiren Ajitbhai 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. Vasuki Information Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India

M/s. Nandaka Information Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India

Sahebzada Azmath Ali Khan Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Hilltop Service Station, Partnership Firm Regd. Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Radhakrishna Service Station Vs M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited

Dundukuru Rajesh Vs Sri N.Sridhar, Ias.R