Smt.Anjuri Roja Bai v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE T.VI NOD KUMAR WRI T PETI TI ON No.2936 of 2020 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondents in detaining the vehicle Activa-5G WEASKSDC, Majestic brown Metal bearing registration No.TS08 GT 3866 of the petitioner and to declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice. 2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home for respondents.

3.

The case of the petitioner is that she is the owner of the vehicle in question, and that on 21.01.2020 she gave her vehicle to her son's friend one Y.Saiteja, and at about 11.00 P.M, when the said Y.Saiteja reached Parvat Nagar within the limits of Madhapur Traffic Police jurisdiction, the 4th respondent and other constables who were deployed there to check vehicles and to determine whether the drivers of those vehicles were in inebriated condition or not, stopped him and subjected him to breath analyzer test and alleged that he is in an inebriated state and seized his vehicle, and that the said vehicle is presently lying at Balanagar Traffic Police Station in the open space and he was also issued with e-challan mentioning violations under Sections 185 (a) and 130/177 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the M.V.Act'), which are not applicable to drunk and driver cases. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent has no jurisdiction to detain his vehicle. 4.

Learned Assistant Government for Home, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle, but on 21.01.2020 at about 11-00 pm, one Y.Saiteja was found driving the vehicle, and when he reached Parvat Nagar within the limits of Madhapur Traffic Police jurisdiction, the respondent police stopped him and subjected him to breath analyzer test and found 112 alcohol reading and since the said Y.Saiteja was not in a position to drive the

vehicle and as he did not produce the relevant documents, the police authorities have taken safe custody of the vehicle temporarily and placed the vehicle at the 4th respondent police station by exercising powers under Section 207 of the M.V.Act. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would further submit that from the documents annexed to the writ petition, it is clear that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle as per the certificate of registration issued by the Transport Department of Telangana and one Y.Saiteja was driving the vehicle on the said date. He would further submit that if the petitioner/owner and the driver of the vehicle in question along with their proof of identity and relevant documents of the vehicle appear before the concerned police authorities with whom the vehicle is in safe custody and on paying the prescribed fine, the vehicle would be released to the petitioner/owner of the vehicle.

5.

Having regard to the above said submissions and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to appear before the 4th respondent authority along with the driver of the vehicle with proof of their identity and relevant documents of the vehicle in question. Upon the petitioner and the driver of the vehicle approaching the 4th respondent or other official, who has the safe custody of the vehicle in question and making an application for release of the vehicle together with relevant documents, the said authority shall consider the same and release the vehicle to the petitioner/owner forthwith by collecting fine as prescribed under the M.V.Act for non-production of documents and also if such vehicle is not involved in any other case. 6.

Subject to the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs.

_____________________ JUSTI CE T.VI NOD KUMAR Date:28.02.2020 grk