The Delhi High Court has mandated that the local government furnish a progress report within a month regarding the development and execution of a policy for the release of seized end-of-life vehicles to their respective owners.

Expressing dismay over the lack of a coherent policy, Justice Jasmeet Singh emphasized that the court routinely receives petitions from disgruntled individuals, underscoring the need for a balance between the government's pollution control efforts and avoiding undue harassment of citizens.

Justice Singh remarked, "This is problematic. Citizens should not be subjected to harassment. Every day, I receive five petitions related to vehicle seizures and non-release."

In response to a series of petitions challenging the confiscation of end-of-life vehicles for violating directives prohibiting the use of petrol and diesel vehicles aged over 15 and 10 years, respectively, the court had previously ordered their release on August 22. The release was contingent upon owners providing an assurance that the vehicles would either be permanently parked in private spaces or taken out of the city limits. Subsequently, the Delhi government was directed to formulate a comprehensive policy for managing such vehicles when owners commit not to use them within the national capital.

During the recent hearing, the counsel for the Delhi government informed the court that the policy was in its final stages and would soon be made public. Acknowledging the progress, the court instructed the respondent to submit the status of the policy within the next four weeks.

This directive was issued in response to a contempt petition filed by the owner of a petrol car older than 15 years, described as a "family heritage." The petitioner, Sushma Prasad, alleged non-compliance with the court's order for the release of her vehicle.

Advocate Aditya N. Prasad, representing the petitioner, stated that, in accordance with the release order, the petitioner had given an undertaking that the vehicle would not be driven or parked on public land. The government counsel suggested that the petitioner could reclaim the vehicle from the scrapping facility by paying the towing charges as per the court's instructions.

Justice Singh cautioned that failure to release the vehicle could lead to contempt proceedings initiated by the court.

Case: Sushma Prasad v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.