Goraknath vs. The State Of Telangana
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, owner of a goods carriage vehicle bearing registration No. TS 16 UB 7338, filed a writ petition seeking its release. The vehicle was seized by the third respondent, the Station House Officer, Narayankhed Police Station (Prohibition and Excise), on March 22, 2024, in connection with COR No. 31 of 2024. The seizure was related to alleged illicit liquor manufacturing and transportation. The petitioner claimed the vehicle was hired by M/s. Venkata Sai Traders, who possessed a valid GST registration, and that the jaggery being transported had a valid waybill. The petitioner is not an accused in the case.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle but not an accused in the case. The vehicle was hired by M/s. Venkata Sai Traders, who possessed a GST registration. Considering these facts, the Court was inclined to grant relief to the petitioner. The Court directed the respondents to release the vehicle upon the petitioner furnishing security by way of a fixed deposit receipt for Rs. 50,000/- to respondent No. 2, pending final orders in the confiscation proceedings. The release of the fixed deposit receipt is subject to the outcome of the confiscation proceedings under Section 46 of the Act, 1968. The petitioner must also provide the original RC Book, an undertaking not to transfer or alienate the vehicle, and an undertaking to produce the vehicle when directed by the court or competent authority. The Court explicitly stated that there would be no order as to costs.
Key Issues
1. Whether the seizure of the petitioner's vehicle, bearing No. TS 16 UB 7338, in connection with COR No. 31 of 2024, is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and the provisions of the Telangana Excise Act, 1968? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that they are the owner of the vehicle but not an accused in the case. The vehicle was hired by M/s. Venkata Sai Traders, who had a GST registration, and the goods being transported (jaggery) were accompanied by a valid waybill. Therefore, the seizure of the vehicle, which is their livelihood, is unjust. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not record specific arguments from the respondents. However, the context implies the respondents seized the vehicle based on information regarding illicit liquor manufacturing and transportation, as detailed in the facts.
Sections Cited
Section 7A, Section 8(e), Section 34(2), Section 46
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following: ORDER
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITI ONN0.8111 0F 2024 ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for prohibition and Excrse
The petitioner's vehicle i.e., Goods Carrrage bearing No. TS 16 UB 7338 was seized by respondent No 3 rn connection with COR. No. 31 of 2024 ot Narayankhed police Station (prohibitron and Excise), Sangareddy District, registered for the offence under Section 7A read with 8 (e) of the Telangana prohibition Act, 1995 and Section 34 (e) read with 34(2) of the Telangana Excise Act, 196g (for short, ,the Act, 1968') 3. lt is alleged that on receipt of credible information, the Excise officials raided H No l -2208 of Dhansingh thanda, H/o Rukmapur Village, Narayankhed Mandal, Sangareddy District, on 22.03.2024. in the presence of panch witnesses. The person present in the house disclosed his name as Chouhan Chander s/o. Narayana, who admitted that the said house belongs to him. The Excise officials rarded the sard house and also the surrounding premises and found illicit liquor being manufactured. They also found one plastic drum containing .100 litres of jaggery liquid and 10 plastic cans with lD Iiquor, whrch revealed that it is illicitly manufactured liquor. The subsequent raids conducted by a l the Excise officials led to seizure of 20 kgs of jaggery. on examintng tvlr. chouhan chander, he confessed that he had been doing business of lD liquor without any permission Samples were taken from the seized contraband and sent for chemical examination 4. lt is submitted that in pursuance of the confession made by Mr.ChouhanChander,theExciseofficialsinterceptedthevehicleof thepetitioneratManoorCrossroadnearNarayankhedandseizedthe vehicle.ThedriverofthelorrylVlr.KotigeBeerappa,s/oVeeranna' has confessed that he is indulged in the business of manufacturing illicit liquor The Excise officials found '1 235 laggery lumps each weighing about 10 kgs., the total weight being 12,350 kgs The samples of the seized jaggery were sent for chemical analysis' 5,Learnedcounselforthepetitionersubmittedthatthepetitioner is the owner of the subject veh|cle, which was hired by [tl/s. Venkata Sai Traders for transporting jaggery. The jaggery stocks are being transported wtth valid way Bill. The hirer of the vehicle M/s. Venkata Sai Traders has GST registration bearing No. 36AFZPG2O55B1ZI'
Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is the owner of the subject vehicle, but not an accused, and as the subject vehicle was hired by M/s. Venkata Sai Traders, this Court is inclined to grant relief to the Petitioner.
J 7 Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions. (i) Pending final orders to be passed in confiscation proceedings before respondent No.2, respondents are directed to release the vehicle i.e., Goods Carriage bearing No. TS 16 UB 7338 on the petitioner furnishing security by way of fixed deposit receipt for an amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) to respondent No.2 (ii) The release of Rs 50,000/- (Fixed Deposit Receipt) shall be subject to ihe result of confiscation proceedings under Section 46 of the Act, 1968, before respondent No.2 (iii) The petitioner shall produce original R.C. Book at the time of release of the subject vehicle (iv) The petitioner shall furnish undertaking that he will not transfer or alienate the vehicle to third party in any manner and will maintain the vehicle in the same good roadworthy condition without changing its major parts and features. (v) The petitioner shall furnish undertaking that he should produce the vehicle as and when directed by the concerned Court or competent authority.
\' 4 There shall be no order as to costs As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition stand closed .A.V,S. PRAS ASSISTANT REGI AR //// SECTION FFICER To 6. Two CD CoPies PSK. SB
The Principal Secretary, Department of Prohibition and Excise Dr'B R' ' ilA;i;;%ringana Secrtitariat, Hyderabad' State of Telanqana'
The Deputv commissio,,Jr"oTpi"hlOlt'"" and Ex-cise' Medak' Ivledak District' 5. +il; 5i-i;; i"rt" "ni""i'ri'iuvinrn"a Police Station (Prohibition and Excise), SangareddY District- 4 il; cA i" sFrr cH.ftnvlNDER, Advocat" Lo-PV.9l
Two ccs to GP FoR Pdii"H-lEiltroN rxdt5e' High court for the State of Telangana, at HYderabad. [OUT] b
i I ) HIGH COURT DATED:2810312024 ORDER WP.No.8111 ot 2024 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. @c'd"q &,, 1HE SI4 t o 14: Y o( l C') I :- c !) 0 3 APR 2rx14 t' t o.€sPATCHeO t b\4"*
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.