IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 21973 of 2004 Between: T.Venkata Ramana, S/o.Siddaiah, R/o.Galiveedu Village, Post & Mandal, Cuddapah District. ... PETITIONER AND The Station House officer, Lakkireddy Palli Police Station, Lakkireddy Palli Village & Mandal, Cuddapah 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 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 respondent in seizure of the petitioner's TATA ALLWYIN NISSAN bearing No.A.P.04-U-4545 on 13-10-2004 as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction apart from being violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondent to release the petitioner's TATA ALLWYIN NISSAN bearing No.A.P.04-U-4545. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.R.REDDY KOVVURI Counsel for the Respondent : GP FOR HOME The Court at the admission stage made the following : O R D E R: The petitioner is the owner of a van bearing No.AP-04-U-4545. The same was seized by the respondent on 13.10.2004. The allegation against the petitioner is that the vehicle was used in transporting 190 bags of rice of 50 Kgs. each, identified as the one meant for distribution in Fair Price Shops. The respondent registered Crime No.94 of 2004. The petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.1219 of 2004 in the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Lakkireddy Palli. The said petition was dismissed on 19.11.2004, on the ground that the crime registered against the petitioner is referable to the provisions of Essential Commodities Act (for short “EC Act”), and in view of the bar under Section 6-E of the Essential Commodities Act, it is not competent for the Court to release the vehicle. This writ petition is filed seeking release of the vehicle. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent is not vested with any power under EC Act, and the seizure itself was without jurisdiction. He submits that the remand report discloses that the violation alleged against the petitioner is the one under Section 406 of IPC and Section 7 (1) of EC Act, and unless the proceedings are initiated before the authority under Section 6-A of the EC Act, it was not competent for the respondent to detain or withhold the vehicle. Learned Government Pleader for Home, on the other hand, submits that once a provision of EC Act is invoked, the petitioner has to approach the concerned authority and the Criminal Court has no jurisdiction to release the vehicle. This case, in a way discloses the over enthusiasm on the part of the respondent, and in his over anxiety he has undertaken functions which did not belong to his area of activity. Even assuming that the vehicle of the petitioner was used in transporting essential commodities meant for distribution in the Fair Price shops, the authorities to take necessary steps are those from the Civil Supplies Department. Neither under the Essential Commodities Act nor under the Control Orders issued there under, the police officials are conferred with any power. Further, out of confusion or lack of experience, the respondent created a situation, which amounts to contradiction in terms. On the one hand, he invoked Section 406 of IPC and Section 7(1) of EC Act, and on the other hand, he has produced the vehicle together with the rice before the Criminal Court. The Criminal Court in turn refused to release the vehicle on the ground that it has no jurisdiction. Therefore, the entire episode discloses either lack of understanding or exhibition of over enthusiasm on the part of the respondent, resulting in untold hardship to the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition is allowed, and the seizure of the vehicle belonging to the petitioner by the respondent is set aside. A sum of Rs.2,000/- (two thousand only) is imposed as costs against the respondent for the inconvenience and hardship caused to the petitioner. The vehicle shall be released forthwith. ________________ 3rd December, 2004 Note: Issue copy in three days (B/o) pan To 1. The Station House officer, Lakkireddy Palli Police Station, Lakkireddy Palli Village & Mandal, Cuddapah District. 2. Two C.Cs. to the Government Pleader for Home, High Court buildings, Hyderabad (OUT) 3. Two C.D.copies