Mohammed Asbat Asad vs The State Of Telangana

Telangana High Court

Mohammed Asbat Asad vs The State Of Telangana on 30 May, 2024

 THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI

           WRIT PETITION No.13390 of 2024

ORDER:

The Writ Petition is filed with the following prayer:

"...to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the high handed action of respondent Nos.5 and 6 in seizing the Vehicle Honda Activa bearing No.AP 11 AS 8779 which stands in the name of petitioner No,2 without any cause and authority as being unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary, capricious, malafide not only violative of principles of nature justice but also violative of Article 19 of Indian Constitution and also contrary to judgment of this Hon'ble Court reported in 2022 (1) ALD 521, consequently direct respondent Nos.5 and 6 to release the Vehicle Honda Activa bearing No.AP 11 AS 8779 which stands in the name of petitioner No.2 forthwith and pass such other order...."

2. It is averred in the writ affidavit that 1st petitioner is a law student pursuing his studies from Sultan UI Loom Law College, Banjara Hills; that on 04.05.2024 at about 9:00 P.M while he was returning to home and reached Taj Krishna Hotel at Banjara Hills, he was stopped by the police on the ground that convoy of the Chief Minister was passing from Banjara Hills road; that as he was stopped for more than 30 minutes and the traffic was over crowded, 2 the Head Constable, who was on duty at that point of time, advised him to go through the next lane; that when he was trying to change the lane, the Sub-Inspector of Police, who was on duty, rushed towards him and snatched the keys and also seized his vehicle i.e., Honda Activa bearing No.AP 11 AS 8779, in the name of 2nd petitioner, who is his mother; and thus he was forced to take a Rapido.

3. It is further averred in the affidavit that he sent e-mails about the incident to respondent Nos.2 to 4 to conduct enquiry against respondent Nos.5 and 6, and in spite of the same, respondent Nos.2 to 4 have not taken any steps. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

4. In support of their contentions, the petitioners have relied upon the judgment of this Court dated 29.10.2021 in W.P.No.1647 of 2021 & Batch.

5. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 6 that the 1st petitioner's vehicle was seized as petitioner was not wearing a Helmet while riding the honda activa on that day. It is further submitted by the learned Government Pleader that if a fresh representation is made 3 to the concerned authority, they shall forthwith release the vehicle following the due procedure.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners have brought to the notice of this Court that a representation, dated 06.05.2024, made by the 1st petitioner to respondent Nos.5 & 6 is pending consideration.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents, considered the rival contentions and perused the record.

8. It is not in dispute that the 1st petitioner was stopped by the respondents-police for passage of CM Convoy, which was on move. It is also not in dispute that the vehicle bearing No.AP 11 AS 8779 was seized. From the record, it is observed that on the given day, the 1st petitioner was not wearing a Protective Gear (Helmet), which as per law he was bound to wear, for his own safety, and the respondent- police stopped him for that reason and seized the vehicle.

9. Without going into the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioners/owner of the vehicle to make a representation afresh to the concerned 4 authority seeking release of vehicle, by enclosing therewith proof of payment of fine, if any, imposed for not wearing a Protective Gear (Helmet). Upon the petitioner/owner of the vehicle approaching the concerned authority as directed above, the concerned authority is directed to release the vehicle i.e., Honda Activa bearing No.AP 11 AS 8779 to the owner of the vehicle, by following due procedure.

10. Needless to say that even if no fresh representation is made, respondent Nos.5 and 6 are duty bound to consider the representation made by the 1st petitioner, dated 06.05.2024, and take steps as per procedure.

11. Subject to the above directions and observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

12. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

_________________________ ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J 30th May, 2024.

vsu/gra