Jammu and Kashmir Court May 2000 Judgments

Abdul Khaliq Malik Vs. State and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: (2001)ILLJ845J& K

ORDERSyed Bashir-Ud-Din, J.1. Considered.2. Admit.3. This petition can be disposed of at this stage, so taken up accordingly for disposal.4. Heard.5. Petitioner, presently working as Senior Assistant in Sub District Hospital Tangdar, prays that his present status as such Senior Assistant in Health Department of the State should not be disturbed and that his services as such Senior Assistant, on which post he is working for number of years, may be regularised.6. It is found on record that the petitioner employee of Health Department is working as Senior Assistant for last number of years. Obviously, the present status of the petitioner and the graded post as Senior Assistant he is holding cannot be disturbed, except in due course of law.7. In State of Haryana v. Piara Singh, AIR 1992 SC 2130 : 1992 (4) SCC 118 : 1993-II-LLJ-937, it was pointed out::'As regards the temporary/ad hoc employees in Government service, the normal rule is regular recruitment through the prescribed agency but e...

Ab. Hamid Dar Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: (2001)ILLJ555J& K

ORDERSyed Bashir-Ud-Din, J.1. Petitioner seeks direction to respondents for consideration of the petitioner on compassionate grounds, on the pleaded facts that the petitioner's brother one Mohammad Maqbool Dar a teacher in Education Department died in a vehicular accident on January 16, 1987. The petitioner's approach to respondents for the appointment, is evoking no response.2. Heard. Record examined.3. One Mohammad Maqbool Dar a teacher died in harness on January 16, 1987. Petitioner is brother of this deceased. He is seeking appointment on compassionate grounds under J. and K. Compassionate Appointment Rules of 1994, on the plea that other dependent members of deceased family, who happened to be brothers and sisters, have filed affidavits that in case petitioner is appointed in place of deceased on compassionate grounds, they have no objection. This is not a ground in the context of rules and within the concept of compassionate appointment to seek appointment under the rules. No gro...

Abdul Rashid Malla Vs. State and anr.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2000CriLJ4333

ORDERSyed Bashiruddin, J.1. Petitioner has been arrested on 22-10-97 in FIR No. 115/97 under Section 7/25, Indian Arms Act, registered at Police Station Lalpora. Subsequently, he has been detained under Section 6 of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the State, by District Magistrate, Kupwara under his Order DMK/PSA/260 of 1998 dated 23-7-1998 for a period of twenty four months. The detenu Abdul Rashid Malla, was taken in preventive detention on 1-8-1998. This order of detention is under challenge in this habeas corpus petition.2. The counsel for petitioner submits that the detenu is an illiterate person, Grounds supplied to him in English language are not understood by him. The order of detention and grounds were not accompanied by any translation or transcript in the language which he understood. He was not even supplied material and documents referred in grounds of detention. Petitioner ha...

Nazir Ahmad Bhat Vs. Mst. Jawahira

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2001CriLJ588

ORDERG.D. Sharma, J.1. Through the medium of this petition inherent jurisdiction of the Court vested under Section 561-A, Cr.P.C. has been invoked to quash order dated 22-10-99 passed by the Judicial (Forest) Magistrate, Srinagar whereby he directed the SHO of the concerned Police Station to free the female child, aged seven months named Bisma from the wrongful confinement of her father namely, Nazir Ahmad Bhat son of Mohmmad Rafiq Bhat resident of Sarmarg Teh. Handwara and produce her in the Court on 27-10-1999. Respondent namely, Mst. Jawahara is the wife of the petitioner and she had made application under Section 100, Cr.P.C. before the said Magistrate alleging therein that on account of strained marital relations, the petitioner herein forcibly took the child from her custody. The child is a suckling baby who is denied the breast feeding and in this manner her life is being endangered. The Magistrate had recorded the statement of the respondent on oath who had stated that petition...

Bansi Lal Vs. State of J. and K.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2001CriLJ3267

T.S. Doabia, J.1. On 11th of September, 1991 at about 1.45 p.m. one Santosh Kumari aged about 19 years set herself ablaze by sprinkling kerosene oil on her person. She was found to be in the kitchen of her house. She suffered serious injuries. She was taken to hospital at Arnas. Police reached in the hospital. Her dying declaration was recorded. This is EXP-RD. The dying declaration when rendered in English this reads as under :-Dying declaration of Santosh Kumari D/o. Shri Krishan Singh R/o. Radoo, aged 19 years, occupation House wife, time 14.15 hours dated 11-9-1991. ...On enquiry stated that I have put myself on fire because all the family members of Nanda family, whether male or female are stating that I am of a depraved character. By sprinkling kerosene oil I have set myself on fire. I could not bear the taunts. I have set myself on fire in the room. My father was called in the morning and he was being told that his daughter is of a depraved character. They resort to abuses daily...

Parshotam Lal and ors. Vs. State

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2001CriLJ3378

T.S. Doabia, J.1. The appellants in these three appeals stand convicted for having committed offences punishable under Sections 20 and 22 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985. They have been directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and pay a fine of rupees one lakh each. In default of payment of fine they are to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years each. They were also convicted under Section 22 of the Act of 1985 and each of them were to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of rupees one Lakh each. In default of payment of fine they were to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 6-8-1989 at 6 p.m. Parshotam Lal appellant was standing under Balol Bridge near Miran Sahib, Tehsil R.S. Pura, Jammu. Chaman Lal appellant was also there. They were found standing therein supicious c...

Wildlife Protection Society of India Vs. State of Jandk

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2003(2)JKJ598

O.P. Sharma, J. 1. The Wildlife Protection Society of India is the petitioner. It claims to be voluntary organisation formed with the aim of averting Wildlife Crisis and also to provide additional support and information required to combat illegal International Wildlife Trade. In this petition the focus of its attention is the threatened extinction of Tibetan Antelope which is commonly known as Chiru. The under-wool of this animal according to the petitioner is used for manufacturing Shahtoosh Shawls. According to the petitioner there have been startling seizures of Shahtoosh Shawls and Shahtoosh between 1992-98 and India accounts for most of the seizures. This is notwithstanding the fact that Tibetan. Antelope is a protected animal under the Central Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. (for short Central Wildlife Act), and despite the fact that India is a signatory to the Convention on International. Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (for short CITES hereinafter) under whi...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Pradeep Kumar

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: [2001]246ITR94(J& K)

Dr. B. P. Saraf C. J.By this reference made under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the 'Tribunal'), has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal had misdirected itself in law in deleting the penalty imposed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner ?' '2. This reference is pending in this court since 1985. The controversy pertains to the cancellation of penalty of Rs. 9,000 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act in respect of the assessment year 1970-71. The Tribunal deleted the penalty imposed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the failure of the assessee to disclose in his original return for the assessment year 1970-71 commission of Rs. 9,000 receivable from one Hari Talkies. This income of Rs. 9,000 was later shown in the revised return. The case of the ...

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala Vs. Pardeep Kumar

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: [2000]246ITR94(J& K)

B.P. Saraf, Chief Justice 1. By this reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, ('Tribunal') has referred the following question of law to this Court for opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal had misdirected itself in law in deleting the penalty imposed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax?'2. This reference is pending in this Court since 1985. The controversy pertains to the cancellation of penalty of Rs.9,000/- imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act in respect of the assessment year 1970-71. The Tribunal deleted the penalty imposed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the failure of the assessee to disclose in his original return for the assessment year 2970-71 commission of Rs.9,000/- receivable from one M/s Hari Talkies. This income of Rs.9,000/- was later shown in the revised return. The case of the assessee was ...

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Paris Dry Cleaners, Srinagar

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

B.P. Saraf, Chief Justice 1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act,1961 ('Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar ('Tribunal') has referred the following question of law to this Court for opinion at the instance of revenue :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that an appeal was maintainable before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner?'2. This reference pertains to the assessment year 1974-75. The controversy is about the maintainability of appeal under clause (j) of section 246 of the Income-tax Act,1961('Act' ) against an order of the Income-tax Officer refusing to condone delay in filing an application for registration of the firm under section 184(4) of the Act.3. At one point of time ,there was a divergence of opinion on this point. That controversy, however, has now been set at rest by the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v Ashoka Engineering Co. : [1992]194ITR645(SC) . In that c...