THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
W.P. No. 3041 of 2023
ORDER:
Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise.
2. The Present Writ Petition is filed to issue Writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of 2nd respondent, in not releasing the petitioner's contract carriage bus bearing No.AR 01 T 7053 seized in Crime (COR) No.13 of 2023 inspite of readiness of the petitioner to furnish third party surety is illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct respondents 2 and 3 to release the petitioner's contract carriage bus bearing No. AR 01 T 7053.
PERUSED THE RECORD
3. The contentions put forth by the counsel for the petitioner are as follows:
a) The petitioner is the owner of contract carriage Bus bearing No. AR 01 T 7053, it is of 2015 model. 2
b) The tax is paid for the vehicle and all the documents of the vehicle are valid.
c) The vehicle has got valid All India Tourist permit to operate the same in entire India.
d) On 30.01.2023 when the vehicle is coming from Goa to Hyderabad with tourist party the same is stopped and checked by the 4th respondent at Kamkola Toll Plaza when it is being operated by driver.
e) And they found around 8 to 10 liquor bottles of different brands (non-duty paid liquor) from the luggage of the passengers, who are travelling in the bus.
f) The 3rd respondent however, drafted the panchanama by showing 31 bottles of different brands of liquor as found in the vehicle, and registered a Crime (COR) No.13 of 2023 under Section 34(a) of Telangana Excise Act, 1968 against the driver and cleaner of the vehicle and now the vehicle is in the custody of the 3rd respondent Police Station.
g) The specific case of the petitioner is that the crime is registered against the driver and cleaner and the vehicle is seized by falsely alleging that the driver and cleaner are transporting the said liquor bottles with an 3 intention to sell the same at Hyderabad to get the profits without the knowledge of the owner.
h) The petitioner requested the 3rd respondent to release the petitioner's vehicle by narrating all the facts, but he refused to release the petitioner's vehicle and a case is registered under Section 34(a) of the T.S. Excise Act.
4. The main grievance of the petitioner is that through the said seizure, the petitioner's vehicle is lying in the premises of the 3rd respondent which is exposed to natural calamities and if the same is kept idle, there is every chance that the vehicle would get damaged, the petitioners business would be affected.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the judgments listed below:
a) Order dated 27.12.2022 passed in W.P.No.45414 of 2022.
b) Order dated 26.12.2017 passed in W.P.No.44088 of 2017.
c) Order dated 03.06.2020 in I.A.No.1 of 2010 in W.P.No.7485 of 2020.
d) Order dated 22.01.2021 passed in W.P.No.1354 of 2021.4
6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents does not dispute the passing of orders by this Court in similar circumstances in favour of the petitioners thereunder.
7. A bare perusal of the contents of the panchanama clearly indicate that the owner is not in any way concerned with the seizure of the vehicle and the said fact is even established in the enquiry and the said fact also finds place in the confession statements recorded in the panchanama, dated 30.01.2023.
8. Taking into consideration all the above referred facts and circumstances and also the view taken by this Court in judgment dated 27.12.2022 passed in W.P.No.45414 of 2022 and also the view taken by this Court in the other judgments of this Court, in cases referred to above in identical circumstances, which is not disputed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, the 2nd respondent is directed to forthwith release the petitioner's contract carriage bus bearing No.AR 01 T 7053 seized in Crime 5 (COR) No.13 of 2023 on condition of the petitioner furnishing security for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) in the form of fixed deposit receipt. The petitioner shall also furnish an undertaking that he will not alienate or change the physical features of the vehicle. Respondent No.2 shall address a letter to the RTA Authority not to transfer the vehicle in favour of any third party without clearance from the Excise Department. The release of the vehicle is subject to further orders that may be passed by the respondents pursuant to enquiry to be conducted under the provisions of the Excise Act.
9. The writ petition is accordingly, disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_________________ SUREPALLI NANDA, J Date:09.02.2023 kvrm