IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 4794 of 2009 Between: Surapaneni Purnachand, S/o.Raghavendra Rao, R/o.H.No.136, New RTC Colony, Patamata Vijayawada, Krishna District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad 2 The Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda District 3 The S.H.O., Chilkur Rural P.S., Chilkur, Nalgonda district 4 The Branch manager, Induslnd Bank Ltd, D.No.40-1-55/A, VVR Square,MG Road Vijayawada, Krishna District .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in with holding the bank guarantee of Rs.4,00,000/- which is lying with 2nd respondent in connection with Crime No.76 of 200 6 on the file of 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary and unjustice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.BRAHMAIAH CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : O R D E R: The petitioner asserts that based on a complaint lodged by one Ch.Satyanarayana, the driver of the bus bearing No.AP10Z 2679 of Miryalaguda Depot, the Station House Officer, Chilkur Police Station had registered a case in Cr.No.73 of 2006 against one Palla Vijay Kumar, who is the driver of the petitioner’s vehicle bearing No. AP TW 3023, for the offences punishable under Sections 337 and 304-A IPC alleging that the petitioner’s vehicle met with an accident and seized his vehicle. While so, the petitioner filed Crl.M.P. No.3961 of 2006 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kodad for release of his vehicle, and the learned Magistrate, by an order dated 24.10.2006 ordered release of his vehicle subject to the condition that the petitioner executes a bond for Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties for like sum, and accordingly, the petitioner furnished bank guarantee of Rs.4,00,000/- drawn on the 4th respondent-Indusind Bank Ltd. Thereafter, the Additional Director General of Police issued a Circular Memorandum dated 20.01.2009 stating that the vehicles involved in accidents should be released from the Police Station itself after inspection by Motor Vehicles Inspector and verification of documents, etc. Now, the petitioner’s grievance is that in view of the Circular Memo, he is entitled to release of his vehicle, and in view of the fact that the learned Magistrate had already ordered release of the vehicle, he prays that the respondents should be directed to release the bank guarantee furnished by him. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Admittedly, the petitioner’s vehicle was released on the petitioner furnishing bank guarantee of Rs.4,00,000/- in pursuance of the order dated 24.10.2006 passed by the learned Magistrate, on certain conditions. If, as per the Circular Memo, issued by the Additional Director General of Police, the petitioner is entitled to release of vehicle without furnishing any bank guarantee, and having regard to the fact that the Magistrate concerned, has directed release of the vehicle, subject to furnishing bank guarantee, for release of the bank guarantee, the remedy of the petitioner, is to file an application before the Magistrate concerned seeking release of his bank guarantee, and certain writ petition is not maintainable. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the Magistrate concerned, who ordered release of the vehicle subject to furnishing of bank guarantee. No costs. _____________ N.V.RAMANA, J 26th March 2009 bcj