logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 APHC 229 print Preview print Next print
Case No : Writ Petition No. 3544 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
Parties : Boya Balanjaneyulu Versus The State of AP, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Amaravathi & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Somisetty Ganesh Babu, Advocate. For the Respondents: GP For Home.
Date of Judgment : 16-02-2026
Head Note :-
Constitution of India - Article 226 -
Summary :-
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India
- Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India
- Section 46 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968

2. Catch Words:
- Writ of Mandamus
- Seizure of vehicle
- Confiscation
- Arbitrary action
- Interim custody
- Violation of fundamental rights

3. Summary:
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the seizure of their vehicle (Mahindra XUV 500) by the Kurnool III Town Police Station in Crime No. 366/2025, alleging it was illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 21. The respondents argued that a charge sheet had been filed, and a proposal for confiscation under Section 46 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968, was pending before the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise. The court noted the delay in submitting the confiscation proposal and directed the Deputy Commissioner to pass orders expeditiously. Meanwhile, the vehicle was ordered to be released to the petitioner’s interim custody, subject to furnishing sureties and compliance with legal requirements.

4. Conclusion:
Petition Allowed.
Judgment :-

1. The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

                  “…to Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing the petitioners vehicle i e Mahindra XUV 500 bearing No AP 26 BL 0567 seized in Crime No.366/2025 of Kumool III Town Police Station as illegal arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release the said vehicle to the petitioner forthwith on such terms and conditions as this Honble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice such other order(s)….”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.

3. Sri P. Ajay Babu, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that after thorough investigation charge sheet has already been filed. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kurnool, III Town Police Station has submitted the proposal for the confiscation of the seized vehicle. Now the proceedings are pending before the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise to take cognizance of the issue and disposal of the seized vehicle in Crime No.366 of 2025.

4. In view of that matter as per Section 46 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968 the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise has got the powers or authority to confiscate the vehicle. The proposal was submitted by the Sub-Inspector of Police of Kurnool, III Town Police Station to the Deputy Commissioner on 06.02.2026. Therefore, the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise Kurnool is directed to pass necessary orders on the confiscation of the vehicle. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the vehicle was seized by the Sub- Inspector of Police Kurnool III Town Police Station on 24.08.2025. The Sub-Inspector of Police Kurnool III Town Police Station ought to have submitted the confiscation proposals under Section 46 of ‘the Act.,’ to the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise at least within a reasonable time of one (01) month till now the vehicle exposed to light, air and rain. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat1.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, until orders are passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise in exercise of powers under Section 46 of ‘the Act.,’ the vehicle shall be released to the interim custody of the petitioner, subject to furnishing sufficient sureties and compliance with other lawful requirements, to the satisfaction of the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate.

6. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.
 
  CDJLawJournal