IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 2839 of 2009 Between: 1 Sri Seetha Ramanjaneya Rice & Parboiled Rice & Oil Mill Rep. by its Partner, Komaravelli Buchaiah, S/o. Lingam Hanuman Nagar, Siddipet, Medak District. 2 Vishnu Priya Industries Rep. by its D. Ramulu, S/o. Shivaiah Mandapally Village, Siddipet, Medak District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by Station House Officer NTPC., Ramagundam, Karimnagar District. .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ or Writs or order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the Station House Officer, NTPC Police Station, Ramagundam, Karimnagar District in seizing the three Lorries bearing No. AP 20W 3138, AP 16 TU 38 & AP 15 V 7479 along with paddy load of 170 quintals each and also detaining the drivers of the said lorries and keeping them in illegal custody without producing them even before the Magistrate, without following due procedure prescribed under the Criminal Procedure Code as illegal, contrary to law, without any authority, violative of Fundamental Rights, Violative of Article 21 and also violative of principles of natural justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MRS.SUPRIYA ALLENI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: O R D E R:- The case of the petitioners, who are running Rice Mills, is that they purchased paddy/seeds from the farmers, and while they were transporting the same from Adilabad to Siddipet, in three lorries bearing Nos. AP-20W 3138, AP16TU 38 and AP15V 7479, each containing 170 quintals, the Station House Officer, N.T.P.C. Ramagundam Police Station intercepted the lorries and seized the paddy/seeds bags along with the lorries, without issuing any seizure report, and detained the Drivers of the lorries in police custody on 3.2.2009 illegally, and registered a suo motu case in Cr. No. 19 of 2009 against the petitioners, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 272 and 511 IPC, which the petitioners contend is arbitrary and illegal. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the lorries have valid permit to transport paddy/seeds from one place to another within the State, and in fact, were transporting the paddy/seeds under valid Way Bills, and as such, the seizure of the vehicles along with the paddy/seed bags, by the Station House Officer, N.T.P.C. Ramagundam Police Station, without issuing seizure report is contrary to law. He further submitted that even the District Supply Officer, Karimnagar, in his letter dated 5.2.2009 addressed to the Tahsildar, Ramagundam, has specifically stated that no permit is required for movement of paddy within the State and that permit is required only when paddy is moved outside the State, and as the movement is from one District to another within the State, no action is necessary in the matter. The learned Government Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that the lorries were transporting spurious paddy seeds, which if allowed to be sold in the market, would jeopardize the interests of the farmers, and therefore, on information about the movement of spurious seeds, the respondent intercepted the lorries of the petitioners, and finding that spurious seeds were being moved, registered a case suo motu. He, however, admitted that the respondent has not produced the lorries before the Magistrate concerned as required by law. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondent. Though the petitioners contend that no permit is required for movement of paddy within the State, it is the case of the respondent that the lorries were found transporting spurious seeds. Be that as it may, it is the admitted case of the respondent that they having registered a case suo motu, have seized the paddy/seeds along with the lorries, but as required under the provisions of law, have not produced the lorries before the Magistrate concerned, and the same are still in their custody. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: “The Station House Officer, N.T.P.C., Ramagundarm, Karimnagar District, after unloading the commodities from the lorries, is directed to release the Lorry bearing Nos. AP20W 3138, AP16TU 38 and AP15V 7479 to the petitioner, upon the petitioner executing bonds to his satisfaction and after obtaining necessary undertaking from the petitioner to the effect that they shall produce the lorries as and when required for investigation and shall not alienate or create any third party rights therein, nor change the nature of the vehicle. Insofar as the paddy/seeds bags after unloading from the lorries are concerned, it is left open to the Station House Officer to produce them before the Magistrate concerned, for appropriate orders.” Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 19th February, 2009 bcj