Jammu and Kashmir Court December 2000 Judgments

State of J and K and anr. Vs. Haba Ganai and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2003(3)JKJ32

O.P. Sharma, J. 1. Both these criminal revisions are against the orders dated 16.7.1998 and 19.9.1998 passed by the Sessions Judge, Anantnag granting bail to the accused facing trial Under Section 302 RPC.2. Facts of the case are briefly as follows:Charge sheet under Sections 302, 307, 148, 336 and 149 RPC against 15 persons was produced by the police on 26.7.1997. Charges under Sections 302/34, 323, 348, 341 and 336 RPC were framed against A-1 to A-4. By order dated 11.8.1997 Sessions Judge, Anantnag framed charges Under Section 341, 336, 323 and 148 RPC against A-5 to A-15, After framing the charges, the learned Sessions Judge while rejecting the bail application on behalf of A-1 to A-4 admitted A-5 to A-15 to bail on furnishing surety of Rs. 50,000. After sometime, A-1 to A-4 who have been charged Under Section 302 RPC also applied for grant of bail. However, vide order dated 16.7.1998 the court released A-2 to A-4 on bail while A-1 was denied bail. Relevant portion of order dated 1...

Mohd. Hanif Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

1. This appeal is directed against a judgment passed by Session Judge Poonch on 26-12-1992 read with one passed on 8-1-1993. By virtue of the judgment under appeal the appellant-accused, who was standing trial before the court below in terms of section 304, part-II, Ranbir Penal Code, was sentenced to rigorous impisonment for five year2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 4-8-1990 at about 6 P.M., the deceased Mohd Amin left for the shop of Mohd Ayub at village Chajla. Accused Mohd Hanif assaulted him and caused injury to his person as a result of which was admitted in the hospital where he succumbed to the injury at 1.30 A.M., in the night. The cause for this, according to the prosecution, was that the accused had illicit relations with one Walayat Bi, who was arrayed as an accused because she had caught hold of the deceased when the injury was inflicted by accused Mohd. Hanif. Walayat Bi accused lateron was found to be a 'child' under Children Court Act and she is facing trial...

Hamidullah Bhat (Trali) Vs. State of J and K

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2003(3)JKJ45

O.P. Sharma, J.1. The Special Judge Anti-Corruption Kashmir framed charges under Section 5(1)(e)/5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Under Section 12/14 of the Publicmen and Public Servants Declaration of Assets and other Provisions Act, 1983 against the petitioner vide order dated 15.11.1999. The petitioner seeks quashing of the charge as well as proceedings on the following grounds:(i) That the Commissioner having not been appointed in accordance with Section 10 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, the Vigilance Organisation was not in existence on 3.12.1996 the date he constituted different teams for conducting raids and 4.12.1996 when FIR No. 37/96 Vigilance Organisation Kashmir was registered. Similarly registration of FIR No. 37/96 on 4.12.1996 is also bad and consequently investigation illegal because the office of Commissioner of Vigilance was lying vacant; (ii) That the documents produced by the accused have not been considered by the trial court at the time of framin...

Ranson Industries Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2003(151)ELT53(J& K)

B.P. Saraf, C.J. (Oral)1. These four appeals are against a common judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 30th January, 1999 in four writ petitions by which the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions and rejected the challenge to the validity of Rule 7A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 ('Rules'). These appeals are, therefore, taken up together for final hearing and disposal. As the facts of all the four cases are identical, we would refer to the facts of only one of the appeals [LPA No. 17/99 (Mangal Sain Verma)].2. The appellant is engaged, inter alia, in the business of manufacture and production of Indian made foreign liquor and spirit. For use as a raw material in the manufacture of Indian made foreign liquor and spirit, the appellant purchases molasses produced in Khandsari sugar factory Excise duty is leviable on molasses under the Central Excise Act, 1944 ('Act') at the rate of Rs. 500/- per tonne (Entry 17.03 of Tariff Act, 1985). Till 1st March, 1997, ...

State of Jammu and Kashmir Vs. Sadaqat Hussain

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: (2001)IILLJ947J& K

1. This reference has landed into this Court by virtue of an order passed by Session Judge, Poonch on 26-7-2000.2. Police received an information from the accused that militants were hiding in a Nallah at village Kasaba of Poonch District. Police registered a case against the informer that he had submitted incorrect information and such information has caused fear and alram to the general public. FIR was registered and after holding 'investigation' challan was prouced U/S 505 RPC before Munsiff Judicial Magistrate Ist. class Poonch who in turn committed the same to the session court.3. Session Judge found two infirmities in the case. One that it was a special offence and was triable by a special court and that production of challan according to the Sessions Judge was erronous. He also found that the challan in the case did not originate from the authority as required under section 505 RPC. The manner in which the investigation agency and the Judicial Magistrate have conduct themselves ...

Nek Ram Sharma and Co. Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: [2003]262ITR692(J& K)

B.P. Saraf, C.J.1. This is an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act/1961 (the 'Act') against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated August 31, 1999, by which the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (the 'Tribunal') remanded the matter to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) to decide the proper gross profit rate to be applied after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the assessee as well as the Assessing Officer and to pass a fresh order.2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant, Ms. Sindhu Sharma, who submits that the Tribunal was not justified in remanding the matter to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) because it was obligatory on its part to consider the relevant facts and decide the proper gross profit rate itself. She submits that the question whether the Tribunal should have decided the matter instead of remanding the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) is itself a question of law which should be examined by this court in an appeal und...

Rom Industries Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

B.P. Saraf, Chief Justice 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the Deputy Excise Commissioner, Toll Post Lakhanpur, not to collect toll tax under SRO-80 of 30th March, 2000 on the crude vegetable oil imported by it in big tankers in the State of Jammu and Kashmir as raw material for manufacture of edible oil by refining the same. The case of the petitioner is that by virtue of SRO-80 dated 30th March,2000, additional toll tax at the rate of 4% has been levied on 'edible oil' and the oil imported by it for refining for manufacture of edible oil being not edible in that form, no additional toll can be levied and collected in respect thereof under the above SRO.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Sunil Sethi. The learned counsel fairly stated that the petitioner is not aggrieved by SRO 80 but by the levy of toll tax thereunder on the vegetable oil imported by it which, according to the petitioner, is not edible oil. The petitioner wants a d...

Nek Ram Sharma and Co. Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

B.P. Saraf, Chief Justice 1. This is an appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act') against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated 31st August, 1999, by which the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) remanded the matter to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) to decide the proper gross profit rate to be applied after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the assessee as well as the Assessing Officer and to pass a fresh order. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, Ms. Sindhu Sharma, who submits that the Tribunal was not justified in remanding the matter to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) because it was obligatory on its part to consider the relevant facts and decide the proper gross profit rate itself. She submits that the question whether the Tribunal should have decided the matter instead of remanding the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) is itself a question of law which should be examined by this Court in an ap...

Nek Ram Sharma and Co. Vs. Itat

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: [2001]115TAXMAN636(NULL)

ORDERSaraf, C.J.This is an appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the order of the Tribunal dated 31-8-1999, by which the Tribunal remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the proper gross profit rate to be applied after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the assessee as well as the assessing officer and to pass a fresh order.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, Ms. Sindhu Sharma, who submits that the Tribunal was not justified in remanding the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) because it was obligatory on its part to consider the relevant facts and decide the proper gross profit rate itself. She submits that the question whether the Tribunal should have decided the matter instead of remanding the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) is itself a question of law which should be examined by this court in an appeal under section 260A. In support of the contention, reliance is placed ...