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,
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
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
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
