Shakeel Ahmad Malik vs Sr. Superintendent Of Police (Acb)
2026 Latest Caselaw 682 J&K/2

Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench

Shakeel Ahmad Malik vs Sr. Superintendent Of Police (Acb) on 13 February, 2026

Author: Rahul Bharti

Bench: Rahul Bharti

                                                   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)                ...Respondent(s)
BLA,BPR and Kup.

Through:   Mr. Waseem Gul, GA


CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE
                             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