IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE NINETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.5083 of 2011 Between: Uppari Gopal ..... PETITIONER AND The Station House Officer, Sub-Inspector of Police, Utkoor Police Station, Utkoor, Mahabubnagar District. ..... RESPONDENT The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.5083 of 2011 ORDER: In this Writ Petition, the petitioner seeks directions by way of Mandamus directing the respondent to release the motor cycle bearing Registration No.AP 22L 0205 (Hero Honda Splendor) by closing F.I.R. No.23 of 2010, dated 18.06.2010. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home. 3. The petitioner herein has lodged a complaint with the respondent police on 15.06.2010 stating that on the aforesaid date, he went to his agricultural field on his motor cycle bearing Registration No.AP 22L 0205 (Hero Honda Splendor) and parked the said vehicle by the side of the road. He stated that by the time he came back from the field, the said vehicle was found missing at the place where he parked. Based on the complaint of the petitioner, a case is registered in F.I.R. No.23 of 2010 on 18.06.2010 on the file of the respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that on 20.01.2011, on information given from one of his villagers, the petitioner could find the vehicle in the outskirts of the village and the same was produced before the respondent. 4. In this Writ Petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that in spite of the fact that the vehicle was produced before the respondent by the petitioner himself, the respondent is not returning the vehicle by closing the F.I.R. 5. On instructions, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader for Home that on the complaint of the petitioner, case is registered in F.I.R. No.23 of 2010 and investigations revealed that one Mr. Upender has committed theft of the vehicle. It is stated that as the vehicle was recovered, it has to be produced before the concerned Magistrate. If the petitioner is the owner, he can move an application before the concerned Magistrate. In that view of the matter, this Court cannot order release of the vehicle and to order closure of crime itself. 6. In view of the submission made by the learned Government Pleader for Home, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition by directing the respondent to produce the vehicle forthwith before the Magistrate, if not already produced. It is open for the petitioner to file an appropriate application to release the vehicle. If such an application is filed, the concerned Magistrate shall consider the matter and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible. 7. Subject to the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) Date: 9th March, 2011 KL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.5083 of 2011 Date: 9th March, 2011 KL