J.Kiran Kumar v. The State Of Telangana And 2 Others
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 5855 OF 2020 Between:
J. Kiran Kumar, S/o. J. Ganesh, Aged about 40 years, Rl/o. Flat No. 107, City Homes, H.No. 3-5-574, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad. PETITIONER AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Gachibowli, Hyderabad The Station House Officer, Traffic, Madhapur, Cyberabad, Hyderabad. ,..RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rdrespondent in seizing and detaining the petitioner's Creta Car bearing Reg.No.
TS-07-FU-3633 on 121212020 on the ground of committing the offence of Drunken Drive, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust. lA No. 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 herein to forthwith release the petitioner's Creta Car bearing Reg.No.TS-07-FU-3633, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N.
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.5855 OF 2O2O ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed to declare the action ol Respondent No.3 in detaining the vehicle bearing registration No. TS 07 FU 3633 of the petitioner, as being il1egal, arbitrary, and constitutional with a consequential relief to direct the 3'd respondent to release the vehicle forthwith.
2.
The matter is taken up for hearing today through video conferencing. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.
3.
The case of the petitioner is that, the petitioner who is owner of the vehicle and on 12.O2.2O2O, when the petitioner was moving in the area falling under the jurisdiction of Madhapur Traffic Police Station, the 3'd 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 the 3.d respondent Police Station in the open space and he was also issued with e-challan mentioning violations under Sections 185(a), 73O,r 177 and 2O7 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, the M.V. Act'), which are not applicable to drunk and drive 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 was found driving the subject vehicle on 12.O2.2O2O at about at 27:59 hrs., when he reached the place near Khanamet junction, falling under the Madhapur Traffic Police Station area jurisdiction, the respondent police stopped and subjected the petitioner to breath analyzer test and found the alcohol reading above the permitted limit and since the petitioner / driver of the vehicle 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 3.d respondent police station by exercising powers under Section 2O7 of the M.V. Act. He would further submit that if the petitioner appears before the concerned police authorities with whom the vehicle is in safe custody, along with his proof ol identity and relevant documents of the vehicle and on paying the prescribed fine, the police authorities would be release the vehicle to the petitioner.
5.
In so lar as the police authorities taking custody of the vehicle on the driver being found in inebriated condition, this Court in W.P.No.2361 of 2Ol9 observed that, "Even if the driver on that particular day was unable to drive the vehicle, that does not mean that respondents can retain the vehicle'. 6.
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 3'd respondent authority with proof of his identity and relevant documents oi the vehicle in question. Upon the petitioner approaching the 3rd respondent or other
J 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 authorify shall consider the same and release the vehicle to the petitioner forthrvith b1'collecting fine as prescribed under the M.V. Act for non-production of documents, other violations and also if such vehicle is not involved in any other case.
7.
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. ISD/.I.NAGALAKSHMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY'
SECTION OFFICER To,
1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad
2. The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Gachibowli, Hyderabad
3. The Station House Officer, Traffic, Madhapur, Cyberabad, Hyderabad.
4. One CC to Sri. N. Sreenivasa Yadav, Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]
6. Two CD Copies Prk 'u\\-
HIGH COURT DATED:07/05/2020 ,4 1.
-t 4I (t N ll {- + ,t/ ,^.*92/ -Z'
ORDER
WP. No. 5855 of 2020 Disposing of the WP.
without costs.
\3\l ttlk