EXCISE COMMISSIONER Vs. AB QAYOOM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the aforesaid four petitions are clubbed together for the purposes of disposal by a common order as the point for consideration in all the four cases is virtually the same.

(2.) CR . Rev. No. 61/2004 has been filed against the orders dated 04 -06 -2004 and 16 -07 -2004 respectively vide which the Truck bearing No. JK -13 0623 seized by Excise Department, registration certificate and route permit relating to the said vehicle have been ordered to be released in favour of the respondent(s). Revision petition No.32/2006 and Petition under section 561 -A No.49 -S/2006 have been filed against the orders of learned Sessions Judge Kathua dated 13 -04 -2006 and 10 -08 -2006 respectively vide which two vehicles (Trucks) bearing registration No.PB -12 G 7866 and PB 10 -Y8055 have been ordered to be released on 'Superdari in favour of the registered owners/respondents.

(3.) IN Cr. Rev. No.85/2006, the order dated 25 -08 -2006 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kathua has been impugned showing the grievance that respondent/accused Jarnail Masih should have also been charged under section 48 -A of the Jammu and Kashmir Excise Act, 1958 (hereinafter for short referred to as the "Excise Act) along with the charges under section 8(c) and 15(c) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'N.D.P.S. Act. In fact he has been charged under N.D.P.S. Act only.