IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 1971 of 2002 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 31.7.2002 in WP NO : 23960 OF 1996 on the file of the High Court.) Between: N.Madhukar, S/o.Sankaraiah, R/o.Hanuman Oil Centre, National High Way Road, Manchirial, Adilabad District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition (F.A.C.) Karimnagar Division, Karimnagar. 3 The Assistant Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, S.O.P.E.O., Adilabad District, Adilabad. 4 The Circle Inspector of Prohibition & Excise, Asifabad Station, Asifabad, Adilabad District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant:MR.G.PRAMOD KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : ORAL JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) Aggrieved by the order, dated 31.07.2002 made in WP No.23960 of 1996 by a learned Single Judge giving interim custody of the car bearing Registration No. ATL- 7469 involved in Cr.No.501/96/DPE/82, to the appellant herein and permitting the respondents to encash the bank guarantee furnish by the appellant, the present writ petition is filed. The appellant herein is the owner of the above car and earns livelihood for him on hire. On 31.5.1996, the said car was seized near Wankidi Check Post alleging that the passengers travelling in the said car from Maharashtra to Godavarikhani were found to be carrying 96 bottles of beer, 40 bottles of whisky and brandy and a crime was registered. On completion of the investigation, charge sheet was laid for the offence under Sec. 8(a) of the A.P. Prohibition Act, 1995. It is case of the appellant that the charge sheet and the panchanama in PR No. 79/94-95 states that two licence holders of liquor, who are engineers working at Singareni Collieries, Godavarikhani, were stationed at Godavarikhani and the contraband belongs to them for their personal consumption. It is his further case that the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Asifabad, found the accused 1 and 2 who are foreigners, guilty and imposed a fine of Rs.200/- each and the accused 3 and 4 who are driver and cleaner of the said car, are not found guilty of the said offence. The said order passed by the learned Magistrate has become final as no appeal is filed. But against the confiscation order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, an appeal has been preferred. The learned Single Judge in view of its huge quantity beyond personal consumption did not accept the contention of the appellant that the contraband belonged to the two foreigners. However, having regard to the orders granting interim custody of the car in favour of the appellant, the learned Single Judge directed the car to be in the custody of the petitioner and permitted the respondent to encash the bank guarantee furnished by the appellant at the time of giving its interim custody. Aggrieved thereby, the present Writ Appeal is filed by the owner of the said car. When this Writ Appeal is taken up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise submits that the bank guarantee furnished by the appellant has expired in 2005 and subsequently the appellant did not renew it. Under the above circumstances, no cause survives in the present writ appeal. However, the learned Government Pleader sought liberty to avail the remedies open to them under law. Liberty is accordingly granted. With the modification of the impugned order as above, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari __________________ Justice Sanjay Kumar July 2, 2009 MAS.