Megavath Peerya Naik v. The State of Telangana
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: E.V. VENUGOPAL
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-02-27. Megavath Peerya Naik v. The State of Telangana. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
t 32se l IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION NO: 5292 OF 2026 Between: Meqavath Peerya Naik, S/o. M. Laxman Naik, Age. 28 years, Occ. Agriculture, (Ofrner of the Vehicle bearing No. TS-15-W-7879), 2-1216' Dudiyal Village and Mandal, Sangareddy District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Telangana, Rep. , by its Principal Secretary, Home Excise Department, Secrelariat buiiding-s, Hyderabad, TS. 2 The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Medak Division at Sangareddy, Sangareddy District. Station, 3. The Station House Officer, Andole, Prohibition and Excise Sangareddy Diskict. ...
RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the be circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring that the inaction of the respondents in not considering the claim of petitioner for release the petitioner vehicle Pulsar 125 Ebony Black solar Red vehicle bearing No. TS-15-EW-7879which is seized in coR. No. 82t2025 dated 07l\8l2o25 0f sHo, Prohibition and Excise station, Andole, Sangareddy District is illegal, arbitrary, and unjust and consequential with a consequential direction to 2nd and 3rd respondents to consider the claim for petitioner for release Pulsar 125 Ebony Black solar Red vehicle bearing No. TS-15-EW-7879 which is seized in coR. No. 82l2025 daled 0710812025 0f sHo.
Prohibition and Excise station, Andole, Sangareddy District in the interest of Justice lA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondent to release the petitioner pulsar . ,l25 Ebony Black Solar lled vehicre bearing No. TS-1s-EW-7g79 which is seized in coR. No. 82l2025 dated oTroat2o2s prohibition of sHo, and Excise station, Andole, Sangareddy District in the interest of Justice pending disposar of the main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt KASIREDDY MOHAN CHANORA HAS Counsel forthe Respondents No 1 & 2: SRI M. ARUN KUMAR, AGP FOR PROHIBITION EXCISE DEPT Counsel for ther Respondent No 3: SRI M. SRINIVAS, AGp FOR HOME The Court mad,-. the following: ORDER l t, i ! I I I I ! I ! i I I I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD . THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.
6292 oI2026 DATE OF ORDERz 27. 0. 2. 2ot26 Between: Megavath Peerya Naik ... Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home (Excise) Department, Secretariat buildings, Hyderabad, TS and 2 others ... Respondents ORDER This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of [ndia, is filed seeking the following relief; ,,.... to issue an appropriate wit, order or Direction more particularly one in tLrc nature of wit of Mandamus bg declaring that the inaction of the respond. ents in not considering the claim of petitioner for relea. se the petitioner uehicle Pulsar 125 Ebong Black solar Red uehicle bearing No. TS-15-EW-7879 tuhich is seized in COR No. 82/2025 dated 07/08/2025 of SHO, Prohibition and Excise Station, Andole, Sangareddg District is illegal, arbitrary and unjust qnd consequential utith a consequential direction to 2nd and 3'd respondents to corusider the claimfor petitioner for releqse Pul. sar 125 Ebong Black solar Red uehicle bearing Ib.
rsI5EW7879 uthich is seized in COR No. 82/2O25 dated 07/08/2025 of SHO, Prohibition Page 2 of6 and ,9xcise Station, Andole, Sangareddg District in the interest of Justi<:e.... " 2. He,erd learned counsel for the petitioner;. Sri M. Arun Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Excise appearing for respondent Nos. l and Z ana Sri M. Srinivas, learned . Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent No. 3 and with their consent, this writ petition is being l:aken up for disposal at the admission stage. 3. Lea. rned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petit:ioner is the absolute owner of vehicle bearing registration No. TS 15 EW 7879. on 07. 08. 2o2s at 06:3g hours respondent No. 3 registered a case in coR No. g2 of 2025 unrjer section B(c) r/w 2O(bxii)(A) of NDpS Act, 198S, alleging illegal transportation of Dry Ganja.
It is further submittel that the petitioner is not an accused in the above case and there is no fault on him and the above said vehicle has beert seized and lying in the premises of respondent No. 3- subsequently, the petitioner made representations before rer;pondent No. 2 requesting to release the said vehicle, but no action has been taken on the said representations. Page 3 of6 Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that due to seizure and detention of the vehicle, the petitioner is facing muih hardship and inconvenience in attending his day-to-day life necessities and seeks a direction to respondents to forthwith release the said vehicle. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise appearing for the respondents would submit that as seen at Column Nos. 12 and 13 of the crime and occurrence report, the petitioner is a pancha claiming ownership of the vehicle.
The petitioner is arrayed as one of the panchas therefore it cannot be stated that the petitioner is not having knowledge about the said crime, hence after seizing the vehicle, the case details would be submitted to the trial Court, therefore at this stage the vehicle of the petitioner cannot be released. 5. The said vehicle was seized in COR No. 82 of 2025 dated O7. O8. 2O25 on the file of respondent No. 3 under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(bxii)(B) of NDPS Act, 1985. According to crime and occurrence report, at Column Nos. l2 and 13, Pagc { of6 the petitir>ner is one of the panchas which would not mean that the is involved in the said crime. F,etitioner 6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in BishwaJit Deg tt. State of Assdm in Criminal Appeal No. 87 of 2025 arising out of SLP (Crl. ) No. 13370 of 2024 categorically held as follows: '34. this Court is also of the uieut that if tlrc Vehicle in the present case is allowed to be kept in the custodg of police till tle tr;.
al b ouer, it will serue no purpose. This Court takes judicittl notice that uehicles in police custodg are stored in the open. Consequentlg, if the Vehicle is not releo,sed during the tial, it toill be uasted and suffering the uagaies of the ueather, its ualue will onlg reduce. " 7. The Honble Supreme Court in Denash o. Stdte of Tamil n,zdu arising out of SLP (Cr1. )No(s). 8698 of 2025 categoric€illy held as follows: o34. l. lthough, on a superftcial reading, the present case might oppeor to utithin tle second scenario delineated in fall Bishl-'ajit Dey (supra| uhere antraband is reauered from the ou. tnels agent (driuer) who is anaged as an accused. , houeuer, the a1tplication of criminal law cannot be reduced to a igid or mechanical formula. Each case must be examined in light of its peculizr facts and ciranmstances. In the present matter, a holistic consideration of the record.
reueals tlat the do not facts align :;tictlg tDith the said category for the following reasons:-- Page 5 of6 i- Firstlg, the appellant is the lauful ou)ner with ualid docaments, and the uehicle woLs commerctallg engaged in transporting a ualuable corusignment of 29,400 MT of iron sheets. 'It is highly improbable to belieue that he would rbk both tLrc costlg uehicle and the high ualue consigned goods and his business goodutitl bg knowinglg allowing narcotics to be transported along with the cargo. ii- Secondly, the contraband, i. e. , 6 kilogram. s of Ganja was recoueredfrom the four charge sh. eeted accased persorLs. iii- Thtrdly, the appellant was not arraigned as an acqtsed and the charge sheet contains no material suggesting that the appellant had knowledge of or conntued in the offence. iu- It cq. n thus, safelg be presumed that the said contraband must haue been procured bg the driuers and/or the khr,lcsis \ without the knowledge or conniuance of the appellant.. " B.
Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Excise, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing the petitioner to approach respondent No. 2 by making appropriate application for release of the vehicle. Upon such application being filed, respondent No. 2 is directed to examine all the documents pertaining to the vehicle and release the salne subject to the condition of depositing the original R. C. Book before the Page 6 of5 authorit]' concerned and the said authority shatl release the vehicle €fter obtaining an undertaking that the petitioner shall not change the nature of the vehicle and not to alienate the said vehicle and upon depositing security in the form of F. D. R. for Rs. 25,OOO/-. 9. With the above observations, this writ petition ls disposed of. There shatl be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall starrd closed. SD/-C.
DEEPIKA TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Home Excise Department, State of Telangana, Secretariat buildings, Hyderabad, TS. 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Medak Division at Sangareddy, Sangareddy District. 3. The Station House Officer, Andole, Prohibition and Excise Station, Sangareddy District. 4. One CC to SRl. KASIREDDY MOHAN CHANDRA HAS, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP FOR PROHIBITION EXCISE ,High Court for the State of Telangana At Hyderabad. [OUTI 6. Two CCs, to GP FOR HOME ,High Court for the State of Telangana At Hyderabad. [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies DAN BS Ml HIGH COURT DATED:2710212026 HE SIAT ORDER 1 t t WP. No. 6292 ot 2026 o z ro )ruc 1 i tr,\fi t t D-.. DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS $ p ) I
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.