Vankudoth Murali vs. The State Of Telangana
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Vankudoth Murali, operates a kirana and jaggery business and possesses a GST certificate. On January 9, 2024, police officials seized 34 bags of black jaggery (1700 kgs, valued at Rs. 17,000) and alum from his vehicle, Ashok Leyland Dosth bearing registration TS-15-UC-5434. A case was registered as FIR No. 11/2024 under Section 34(e) of the Telangana State Excise Act, 1968. The petitioner claims he presented bills and his GST registration, asserting that white jaggery is not a prohibited item. He filed a writ petition seeking a declaration that the inaction of the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise in releasing the seized jaggery and vehicle is illegal and arbitrary, and consequently, to direct the release of the vehicle.
Held
The Court noted the petitioner's prayer to make an application under Section 46 of the Telangana State Excise Act, 1968, for the release of the seized jaggery. The Court disposed of the writ petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file such an application before the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Warangal. The Court directed the Deputy Commissioner to examine the application and pass appropriate orders for the release of the seized jaggery within two weeks of its filing. This release would be subject to the petitioner furnishing a personal bond equivalent to the value of the stock. The Court did not make a final determination on the legality of the seizure itself, but rather facilitated the procedural mechanism for seeking release of the goods.
Key Issues
1. Whether the seizure of black jaggery and the subsequent inaction of the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise in releasing the seized goods and vehicle, despite the petitioner possessing GST registration and bills, is illegal, arbitrary, and unjust, violating Articles 14, 19, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that the seizure of jaggery was impermissible as white jaggery is not a prohibited item under the Excise Act. He also argued that the inaction of the respondent authorities in releasing the seized goods and vehicle was illegal and arbitrary. He relied on his GST registration and bills as proof of legitimate business. Revenue's Arguments: The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise submitted that the jaggery stock was seized after a search, and a case was registered under Section 34(e) of the Act, 1968. They further stated that the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise is the competent authority to release the seized articles or order their confiscation.
Sections Cited
Section 34(e), Section 46
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following: ORDER i i
n THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C. V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.1772 OF 2024 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: "...to issue a writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus dectaring inaction of the 2'd respondent is releasing the petitioner's black jaggery 34 bags ( 34 x 50 = 177 kgs) each kg Rs.10/- total worth of Stock is 1700 x 10 = 17, OOO l- seized in FIR No.11/2024 dated 09.O1.2024, seized of Petitioner's vehicle was being, illegal, arbitra-ry and unjust also Articles 14, 19,21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and consequently to dirct 2'd respondent to release of the vehicle to the petitioner forthwith-.," - 2. The case of the petitioner is that he is running Kirana shop under the name and styie of M/s. Sri Laxmi Ganapathi Kirana and Jaggery. He is doing kirana and jaggery business and he also obtained GST certificate for running the said business. It is the case of the petitioner that he used to purchase jaggery on whole sale basis and sell the same to needy customers on retail basis.
On 09 .Ol .2024 at 15:00 hours, on the instructions of the superior officers, respondent No.3, the Head Constable, PS Marripeda, ':rlong with his staff conducting patrolling duty towards Thanamcherla |jl$e...fort. from Marripeda and when they reached at the outskirts of !,Iry1neda Bungalow at 15:OO hours, one trolley vehicle, which was coming from opposite direction and on seeing the police part5r, they stopped the trolley vehicle and escaped from the scene under suspicious
w 2 circumstances. The Excise officials stopped the vehicle and found black jaggery in 34 bags (34x50:1700 kgs) 17 Qtls and Alum (2x50 = 1OO kgs)) 1 Qtls in the said trolley i.e., Ashok Lay Land Dosth company bearing No.TS- 15-UC-5434. After seizure of contraband, panchanama was conducted in the presence of two mediators and thereafter, the case property along with vehicle was sent to police station and registered a case in Crime No. I I of 2024, dated 09.01.2O24 under Section 34 (e) of the Telangana State Excise Act, 1968 (for short, 'the Act, 1968J.
It is the further case of the petitioner that in spite of showing the bills and GST registration certificate, respondent No.3 seized the jagg.ry, which was being carried in Ashok Leyland Dosth Vehicle bearing No.TS- 15-UC-5434. It is the further case of the petitioner that white jaggery is used for domestic purpose and not prohibited and not banned item as per law, therefore, the respondents- police seizing of the white jaggery is not permissible under the provisions of the Excise Act.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise, on instruclions, would submit that after conducting search, the respondents-police have seized the jaggery stock arld registered a case in Crime No.1l of 2024, dated 09.O1.2O24, under Section 34(e) of the Act, 1968. Learned Assistalt Government Pleader further submitted that the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise is v a.) the competent authority to release the seized articles or for confiscation of the same.
At this stage, leamed counsel for the petitioner prayed this Court to permit the petitioner to make an application under Section 46 of the Act, 1968 on the file of the Deputy Commissioner, Excise for release of the white jaggery seized in Crime No. 11 of 2O24. 7 .
In view of the above submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to make an application before respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Warangal, Warangal District, under Section 46 of the Act, 1968 for release of the white jaggery seized in Crime No. 1 I of 2024, dated O9.Ol .2024 and if such an application is filed, respondent No.2 is directed to examine the same ald pass appropriate orders for release of the seized jaggery within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of hling such application by the petitioner and also subject to the petitioner furnishing personal bond of equivalent value ofthe stock. Miscellaleous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. There sha,ll be no order as to costs. . P. PADMANABHA REDDY ASSISTANT IS R //II SECTION OFFICER 'l . The Principal Secretary, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secetariate, Hyderabad, State of Telangana.
The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Warangal, Warangal District.
The Station House Officer, Maripeda Police Station, Maripeda, Mahabubabad District.
One CC to SRI LAXMAIAH KANCHANI Advocate [OPUC] 3 To,
5 IH,:fu.i,t:,Eir53f,5b?l+B*roN EXcrsE' High court ror the state or Two CCs to GP FOR HOIVIE' High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]
BSR GJP
Two CD CoPies s / I I i
HIGH COURT DATED: 2410112024 ORDER WP.No.1772 of 2024 $ 1 ttB 2[2[ ir \ t\E STATA: { ). e o,J I * l) DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS 0@u w.-- (,\* ,.-t *. i
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.