Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 367 (AP)

Arun Kumar H v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2021-06-30

M.GANGA RAO

body2021
JUDGMENT M Ganga Rao, J. - The order of respondent No.2 dated 10.06.2021 in Rc.No.K11/238/2021 directing the petitioner to furnish Bank Guarantee for a sum of Rs.3,23,000/- for release of the petitioner's Eicher vehicle bearing No.KA 16 D 4407, which was seized in connection with Crime No.117 of 2021 on the file of 4th respondent police station, is questioned in the writ petition as being illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. With their consent, the Writ Petition is being disposed of at the admission stage. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the Eicher Goods carriage vehicle bearing registration No.KA 16 D 4407. He is using the same for transportation of goods. On 29.05.2021 the petitioner's vehicle was engaged by one Veerabhadreswara Traders for transportation of rice from Terubeedhi, Karnataka State to SLR Boiled Industries, Karnataka and while the rice was being transported in the vehicle, 3rd respondent intercepted the vehicle and seized the same along with 340 bags of rice under the cover of a panchanama, dated 30.05.2021 stating that the rice is PDS rice and is being illegally exported to Karnataka State and registered a case in Crime No.117 of 2021 for the offences punishable under Section 7 of the E.C. Act and kept the vehicle in the custody of the 4th respondent. Thereafter on a report said to have been submitted by the 3rd respondent the 2nd respondent while initiating the proceedings under Section 6-A of the E.C. Act issued the impugned order ordering to furnish bank guarantee/cash security deposit drawn on any nationalized bank in favour of the District Collector, Ananthapuram District, for a sum of Rs.3,23,000/- for release of the petitioner's vehicle. Aggrieved of the same, the Writ Petition is filed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's vehicle was engaged for transportation of rice under proper bills. The vehicle was intercepted and seized stating that the rice is PDS rice. Petitioner is the owner of the vehicle. He is not aware whether the rice bags loaded in the vehicle are PDS or not. Petitioner is no way concerned with the rice. Petitioner depends on the income derived from the vehicle for his livelihood. The vehicle was intercepted and seized stating that the rice is PDS rice. Petitioner is the owner of the vehicle. He is not aware whether the rice bags loaded in the vehicle are PDS or not. Petitioner is no way concerned with the rice. Petitioner depends on the income derived from the vehicle for his livelihood. Since the vehicle is kept in the open area of the 4th respondent Police, there is every likelihood of damage to the vehicle due to vagaries of the weather and lack of proper maintenance. It is very difficult for the petitioner to obtain bank guarantee for Rs.3,23,000/-. The petitioner is ready and willing to furnish personal bond with local third party immovable property security/collateral security and will abide by the conditions that would be imposed while releasing the vehicle. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the learned counsel and on perusal of the material record, this Court, in the interests of justice, felt it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to get the vehicle valued by the concerned Motor Vehicle Inspector in the presence of the petitioner after serving notice on him and the petitioner is directed to furnish the local third party immovable property security by executing a bond in favour of the appropriate authority strictly adhering to the Stamps and Registration Laws as per the value fixed by the Motor Vehicle Inspector and, on production of such immovable property as security, the respondents are directed to release the Eicher Goods Carriage bearing No.KA 16 D 4407 to the petitioner towards interim custody. The petitioner shall give proof of ownership of the vehicle and an undertaking that he will not alienate, alter its nature or create any encumbrance over the same, pending proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act. 6. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 7. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.