Shanigaram Venkat Reddy v. The State Of Telangana,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.494 of 2015 ORDER:

Upon hearing the learned counsel for petitioner, at the admission stage, the petition is ordered as follows:

It is seen that the offence alleged in this case is under Section 34(e) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is the registered owner of the vehicle i.e., Eicher Van bearing Registration No. AP 15 TB 4018 and the police have seized the vehicle and kept in the premises of Katram Police Station, and it is subjected to speedy and natural decay and the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Manthani, dismissed his petition in Crl.M.P.No.1016 of 2014 on an erroneous ground that he has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition. Having regard to the fact that the offence alleged is under Section 34(e) of A.P. Excise Act and as per Section 46 of the Excise Act, the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise is the competent authority to pass an order for confiscation /release and interim custody etc., the petitioner is directed to file a petition seeking interim custody of the property seized and the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise shall pass an order on merits thereon within one week from the date of filing of the petition before him.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ______________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO,J 06-02-2015 eha

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO

CRL.P. No. 494 of 2015 Dt. 06.02.2015 eha