Jammu and Kashmir High Court
CRM(M)/49/2026 of SHAKEEL AHMAD MALIK Vs SR.SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (ACB) BLA,BPR ANDKUP on 13 February 2026
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:
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
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
13.02.2026
1. The cause title of this petition is “Petition under Section 528 BNSS”.
2. There 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 the petition/memo of appeal accordingly.
3. This 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.
4. In this case, the petitioner is aggrieved of order dated 24.03.2023.
5. This Court finds nothing wrong in the order dated 24.03.2023.
6. This 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.
7. Once the 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.
8. By 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.
9. In 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 the 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.
10. A Copy of this order be forwarded to Special Judge, Anti Corruption.
11. Disposed of accordingly.
(RAHUL BHARTI)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR: 13.02.2026 Shabroz