VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Jammu and Kashmir High Court 2026 › High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh

Shakeel Ahmad Malik v. Sr.Superintendent of Police (Acb) Bla,Bpr Andkup

Disposed Off
Court
High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh
Decided
13 February 2026
Bench
Rahul Bharti, Judge
Case no.
CRM(M) 49/2026

Follow Jammu and Kashmir High CourtFollow Rahul BhartiFollow Judge

Judgment

ORDER

13.02.2026

¶1The cause title of this petition is "Petition under Section 528 BNSS".

¶2There is no such liberty reserved for the lawyers/litigants to mention law in an abbreviated form in cause titled of petition/memo of appeal once a particular Act itself bears full name as well as statue number which are the only reference points for the purpose of referring an Act but the routine tendency of using the abbreviated or initials of an Act in the very cause title of the petition/memo of appeal is not a healthy practice as the Examination Counter of a High Court is manned by the officials who are not law knowing so as to understand as to what abbreviated mention of an Act actually means so as to categorize petition/memo of appeal accordingly.

¶3This Court, therefore, issues direction to the Registrar Judicial, Srinagar as well as the Registrar Judicial, Jammu to pass on requisite instructions to be strictly followed by the Examination Counter not to entertain petitions, memo of appeals revisions which do not bear full mention of the Act/Code/Rules in the cause title by reference to which a given petition/memo of appeal/revision is intended to be filed.

¶4In this case, the petitioner is aggrieved of order dated 24.03.2023.

¶5This Court finds nothing wrong in the order dated

24.03.2023.

¶6This Court cannot undermine a judicial order passed by Special Judge, Anti Corruption whereby the Court in a very concerning manner secured the interest of the petition with respect to handicap of original service book by observing that Investigating Officers is at liberty to prepare a shadow copy of the service book and handover the same to DDO concerned after attestation and against proper receipt for enabling the DDO to take further process as required with respect to release of shadow copies of the service book shall not be construed as direction to release the salary benefits to the petitioner which shall be released otherwise under the rules as prescribed.

¶7Once Special Judge Anti Corruption, Baramulla, Kupwara and Bandipora has taken care of the concern of the petitioner with respect to seizure of a service book which is subject matter of investigation in relation to FIR No. 04/2021 by Anti corruption Bureau Kashmir then this cannot lie at the end of the petitioner to come to this Court invoking inherent powers for the release of original service book if the plea of the counsel for the petitioner is to be expected then investigation is meant to stay on a shadow service book whereas the original service book would be at the service of DDO.

¶8By that reference DDO is being accorded high pedestal than Court of Special Judge, Anti Corruption which has otherwise commanded upon the DDO concerned to entertain the shadow copies of the service book to be provided by the concerned employee whose service book has come under seizure therefore this petition is held misconceived.

¶9In case the petitioner concerned that his pension settlement case or for that matter release of salary or other benefits would get hampered because of absence of original service book then the petitioner shall be well within his right to approach the Special Judge, Anti Corruption Baramulla, Kupwara and Bandipora for apprising the said Court about the procedural difficulty petted against him/her in salary/pension related issues and accordingly Special Judge, Anti Corruption was deal with the matter so that the petitioner in the present context or for that matter any other official or employee similarly placed in terms of seizure of service book do not suffer any prejudice.

¶10A Copy of this order be forwarded to Special Judge, Anti Corruption.

¶11Disposed of accordingly.

(RAHUL BHARTI)

JUDGE

SRINAGAR:

13.02.2026 Shabroz

Case details

Parties and counsel

Serial No.116 SUPPLEMENTARY CAUSE LIST IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CRM(M) No. 49/2026 Shakeel Ahmad Malik …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Syed Abid Parvaz, Advocate Vs. Sr. Superintendent of Police (ACB) BLA,BPR and Kup. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Waseem Gul, GA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE

Source: High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.