JATOTHU SRINU Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As per the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition it could be seen that the 2nd respondent - Station House Officer, Mripeda Police Station, Mahabubabad District, registered a case in Cr.No.229 of 2019 dated 16.08.2018, under the provisions of Section 34(E) of A.P. Excise Act, on the file of Maripeda Police Station Mahabubabad District, alleging that during the vehicles check, they detected 200 kgs of Jaggery and 10 kg of alum in the vehicle of the petitioner bearing No. TS 26 T 0085 and accordingly the said vehicle was seized under panchanama. The case of the petitioner is that false case has been registered for statistical purposes and that the entire investigation is completed and the case is at the stage of filing charge sheet. Now the grievance of the petitioner is that the vehicle is lying idle with the 2nd respondent, and though he approached the said respondent for release of the vehicle giving an undertaking that he will co-operate with the investigation, the vehicle is not being released. Hence, the present writ petition.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has earlier approached the 3rd respondent - Deputy Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise Office, Warangal Waragal District, by filing a petition under Section 457 of Cr.P.C., but the said authority returned the petition stating that he has no jurisdiction to release the vehicle. Petitioner states that the above said vehicle seized by the 2nd respondent, is laying in open space and there is every possibility of vehicle getting damaged. He submits that the petitioner is ready to furnish an undertaking that he will co-operate with the investigation and that he is also ready to furnish security and hence the competent authority may be directed to release the vehicle.

(3.) Heard the learned Government Pleaders for Home and Prohibition and Excise.