Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14839 (AP)

Siga Ramesh Babu, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/9496/2025 · 2025-04-17

Kiranmayee Mandava

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010186662025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: Between: Siga Ramesh Babu and others The State of Andhra Pradesh and Counsel for the Petitioner Counsel for the Respondent The Court made the following order: The writ petition is filed challenging seizing and not releasing the vehicles vide and Lorry bearing No.AP39UL relevant procedure established by law under APMMC Rules, 1966. 2. Heard Sri Gundala Siva Prasada Reddy petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home Assistant Government Pleader for respondents. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 9496 of 2025 others ...Petitioners AND Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: Gundala Siva Prasada Reddy Counsel for the Respondents: GP for Home GP for Revenue GP for Mines and Geology The Court made the following order: The writ petition is filed challenging the action of 4threspondent in and not releasing the vehicles vide JCB Registration No.AP37CT0979 AP39UL3253 of the petitioners without following relevant procedure established by law under APMMC Rules, 1966. Gundala Siva Prasada Reddy, learned counsel for the s, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for the IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3458] THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Petitioners Respondents Gundala Siva Prasada Reddy for Mines and Geology respondent in AP37CT0979 3253 of the petitioners without following the learned counsel for the and learned appearing for the 3. It is contended that the FIR was registered by the 4th respondent against the petitioners and the vehicles belonging to the petitioners were seized on 06.04.2025. It is contended that the petitioners were never engaged in any illegal mining activity. The petitioners contend that without there being any order that the petitioners have indulged in any unlawful activities, the order of the respondents seizing the vehicle(s) is not sustainable. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the 4th respondent would submit that the petitioners were doing unauthorized excavation of soil at Nekkalu Village. Therefore, the subject vehicles were seized. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners argues that the petitioners are solely dependent on the income generated from out of the job works executed through the subject vehicles. Since 06.04.2025, the vehicles were under seizure and are exposed to sun and any prolonged, such exposure of the vehicle to climatic conditions would cause damage to the vehicle(s) and the petitioners are also deprived of their livelihood. Thus, seeks for release of vehicles. 6. The learned Government Pleader would request the court to direct the petitioner to deposit certain amount before they seek for release of vehicle(s). 7. Taking into consideration the contentions advanced by both the learned counsels, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: (i) The 4threspondent shall give interim custody of the JCB Registration No.AP37CT0979 and Lorry bearing No.AP39UL3253 to the petitioners upon his furnishing a personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- each and producing proof in support of his ownership of the vehicle; (ii) The petitioner shall give an undertaking to produce the vehicle as and when required either by the authority concerned or Court or the Investigating Agency and also give an undertaking that he will not alienate, encumber or alter the physical features of the vehicle. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 17.04.2025 BSK 11 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 9496/2025 Date: 17.04.2025 BSK