Madras High Court
Mohamed Ismail vs The Deputy Superintendent Of ... on 25 July, 2023
W.P.(MD)No.17739 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 25.07.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P.(MD)No.17739 of 2023
Mohamed Ismail ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Prohibition Enforcement Wing,
Ramanathapuram District.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Thiruppullani Police Station,
Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to release the petitioner's
two wheeler vehicle in bearing Registration No.TN 65 AS 6672 within stipulated
time to be fixed by this Court, by considering the petitioner's representation,
dated 05.07.2023.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Mahendrarajan
For Respondents : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi (Crl. side)
Government Advocate
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17739 of 2023
ORDER
The petitioner, who is the owner of two wheeler vehicle bearing
Registration No.TN 65 AS 6672, has filed this petition seeking direction
directing the respondents to release the petitioner's vehicle.
2. The 2nd respondent seized the vehicle in Crime No.71 of 2023
finding that on 08.04.2023, the petitioner's vehicle was involved in offences
under Sections 4 (1) (a) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act. The complaint is that
when the 2nd respondent along with his team was keeping surveillance watch over
the prohibition offenders, at that time, he was involved in illegal Transportation
of liquors by using the petitioner's two wheeler vehicle bearing Registration
No.TN 65 AS 6672. Finding that the vehicle was involved in prohibition offence,
the vehicle was seized later and produced in the police station.
3. The contention of the petitioner is that the seized vehicle of the
petitioner is now kept in open, in the police station exposing to vagaries of
weather, and the vehicle is kept idle. The value of the vehicle is diminished and
continuing to keep the vehicle in open would make the vehicle unusable. The
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17739 of 2023
respondent police not followed the instructions contemplated in G.O.Ms.No.39,
(Home), Prohibition and Excise (VII) Department, dated 22.10.2019. The
respondents have failed to follow Section 14(4) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition
Act.
4. In view of the same, the questioning of detaining the vehicle and
auctioning the same without any confiscation does not arise. The vehicle has also
not been produced before the lower Court as a case property. The petitioner,
further relied upon the judgment of this Court in W.P.(MD).No.12769 of 2020
(Selvaraj Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District, Trichy) dated
28.09.2020, wherein, in similar circumstances, this Court had passed an order
granting interim custody of the vehicle.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submits that in this
case, the vehicle, though was seized by the respondent police on 08.04.2023, the
vehicle is yet to be produced before the lower court as a case property in Crime
No.71 of 2023, but the seized liquor bottles were produced. The vehicle was not
produced, since they are contemplating to initiate confiscation proceedings. He
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17739 of 2023
further submits that the 2nd respondent sent the communication to the Additional
Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram to initiate the confiscation
proceedings, but yet to receive any orders from the Additional Superintendent of
Police.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not aware
about the confiscation proceedings, no notice served to him, finding that the
vehicle seized in the month of April 2023 and so far, the vehicle neither produced
before the lower court, nor confiscation proceedings initiated. Only now request
made to the Deputy Superintendent of Police. It is made clear that it is open to the
respondents to initiate and conclude the confiscation proceedings interim custody
of the vehicle alone granted this court in an identical situation had directed
release the seized vehicle and handed over to the petitioner. The respondents to
release the said vehicle subject to the following conditions:-
?a. The petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/-
(Rupees Five Thousand only) in favour of the Legal Service
Authority, Ramanathapuram District. It will be a non-refundable
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17739 of 2023
payment. The Legal Service Authority is directed to spend the
amount for appropriate welfare activities.
b. The petitioner shall not alienate or encumber the vehicle
in question till the proceedings are completed.
c. The petitioner shall produce all the documents pertaining
to the ownership of the seized vehicle.
d. As and when the respondents call for the vehicle for
enquiry, the petitioner has to produce the vehicle in question and
he shall cooperate with the enquiry to be conducted by the
respondents.
7. Upon completion of these formalities, the respondents shall release
the vehicle forthwith without any delay. If this undertaking given by the petitioner
is breached, the petitioner will not be entitled to interim release of the vehicle in
future. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. No costs.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17739 of 2023
8. It is made clear that it is only the interim measurement subject to
the outcome of the confiscation proceedings.
Index : Yes / No 25.07.2023
Internet : Yes
ksa
Note : Issue a copy of order on 02.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17739 of 2023
To:
1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Prohibition Enforcement Wing,
Ramanathapuram District.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Thiruppullani Police Station,
Ramanathapuram District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17739 of 2023
S.SRIMATHY, J
ksa
Order made in
W.P.(MD)No.17739 of 2023
25.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
