Jammu And Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Monthly Digest May 2024

Jahangir Ahmad Wani Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 98

Fayaz Ahmed Kaloo Vs Tej Krishan Ganjoo 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 99

Ghulam Mohammad Bhat Alias Gull Bhat Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 100

Abdul Hamid Khandey Vs United India Insurance Company Limited and others 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 101

Rupen Patel Vs Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 102

GHULAM QADIR MIR & OTHERS Vs UT OF J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 103

Yaar Mohammad Kataria & anr V/s Union of India & ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 104

Kunti Devi Vs Neelam Devi 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 105

Mohd. Sadeeq vs State of J & K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 106

Jaswant Singh Vs State Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 107

Mysar Jan Vs J & K HANDICRAFTS & ORS 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 108

Gulshan Kumar Vs U.T. of Jammu & Kashmir 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 109

Naseer Ahmad Vs Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 110

Mst Khalida Vs Financial Commissioner (Revenue) 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 111

Jasvinder Singh Dua Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 112

Rehmatullah Naik Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 113

Suhaib Sahil Vs UT th. J&K Sports Council and ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 114

Sheikh Mohammad Sadiq (deceased) Through his Legal Representatives Vs Jammu & Kashmir Bank 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 115

M/s A L Construction Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 116

Mst. Raja Vs State Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 117

Mohammad Shafi Vs Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 118

FAROOQ AHMAD WANI Vs TARIQ AHMAD KHAN 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 119

Ashok Kumar Vs State 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 120

Abdul Rashid & Ors Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 121

Rafaqat Ali Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 122

Abdul Basit Vs University of Kashmir 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 123

Farooq Ahmad Sheikh Vs Tariq Ahmad Malik 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 124

Manzoor Hussain Vs Syed Mohsin Abbas 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 125

Owais Naseer Sheikh Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 126

Masarat Jan Vs Fayaz Ahmad Parray 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 127

Mohammad Shafi Malik Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 128

Bhajan Singh Vs State Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 129

ABDUL QADIR BHAT AND ANOTHER Vs M/S SHRI RAM TRANSPORT FINANCE Co.Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 130

Abdul Rashid Zargar Vs Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 131

WASEEM AHAD AND OTHERS Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 132

Mohammad Rafiq Rather Vs Sara Banoo 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 133

WASEEM AKRAM & ANR Vs UT OF J&K AND ANR 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 134

MUDASIR AHMAD DAR Vs. MST.MASHOOKA AND ANOTHER 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 135

Updesh Kour Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 136

Ghulam Mohi-ud-Din Lone Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 137

Chaman Lal Vs Sh. Mohd Sharief 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 138

Roop Singh Vs Pritam Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 139

Khursheed Ahmad Lone v. Union Territory 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 140

Qurat-ul-ain Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 141

Judgments/Orders:

[Preventive Detention] Courts Should Respect Subjective Satisfaction Of Detaining Authority To Release Accused On Bail If Backed By Cogent Material: J&K High Court

Case Title: Jahangir Ahmad Wani Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 98

Clarifying the scope of judicial review in preventive detention cases the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court acknowledged that courts generally should respect the "subjective satisfaction" of the detaining authority and its apprehension that the person might get bail, however, this immunity is not absolute.

The court stressed that this immunity applies only when the said subjective satisfaction is based on strong and cogent material.

J&K HC Dismisses Plea By Greater Kashmir Newspaper To Quash Defamation Proceedings For Publications Against DAV's Management Committee

Case Title: Fayaz Ahmed Kaloo Vs Tej Krishan Ganjoo

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 99

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a petition filed by Greater Kashmir, a J&K based newspaper, seeking to quash defamation proceedings initiated against the publication for allegedly defamatory news articles concerning the DAV Management Committee.

A bench of Justice Rahul Bharti thus vacated its interim freeze order on the proceedings that had been in force since 2019.

J&K Shariat Act, 2007 Paramount In Nature, Overrides All Customary Laws Within Domain Of Personal Law Matters: High Court

Case Title: Ghulam Mohammad Bhat Alias Gull Bhat Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 100

Underscoring the paramount nature of the J&K Shariat Act 2007, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the J&K Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 2007 overrides all customary laws in personal law matters.

Upholding the order of a lower forum in terms of which it has set aside a mutation done in contravention to the Act Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed,

“Section 2 manifestly postulate that the Act of 2007 is enjoined upon to apply the Muslim Personal Law in all cases relating to the matters specified therein notwithstanding any customs or usages to the contrary”.

Insurance Company Not Liable To Indemnify If Vehicle Owner Fails To Discharge Initial Onus Regarding Validity Of Driver's License: J&K High Court

Case Title: Abdul Hamid Khandey Vs United India Insurance Company Limited and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 101

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that an insurance company cannot be held liable to compensate an insured unless the vehicle owner discharges the initial burden of proving the driver's license validity.

Economic & Public Interest Valid Grounds For Initiating LOCs Provided They Are Founded On Substantial Material: J&K High Court

Case Title: Rupen Patel Vs Union Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 102

Clarifying the scope under which Look Out Circulars (LOCs) can be issued, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that LOCs can be used against individuals if their departure from the country would be detrimental to the economic or public interests, provided the decision is based on substantial material.

Unregistered Agreement To Sell Doesn't Grant Ownership Rights, No Suit For Declaration Can Be Filed Based On Such Agreements: J&K High Court

Case Title: GHULAM QADIR MIR & OTHERS Vs UT OF J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 103

Reinforcing the legal principle that an unregistered agreement to sell cannot confer any right, title, or interest in immovable property the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that such agreements do not grant ownership rights.

Benefits Under Central Assistance Scheme Can't Be Denied To Victims Of Terrorism Solely Because Incident Occurred Before Its Official Launch: J&K High Court

Case Title: Yaar Mohammad Kataria & anr V/s Union of India & ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 104

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that victims of terrorist violence, communal clashes, left-wing extremism, cross-border firing, and mine/IED blasts cannot be denied benefits under the Central Scheme for Assistance to Civilian Victims (CSACV) solely because the incident occurred before the scheme's official launch.

Wife Attending Midnight Calls Despite Husband's Repeated Objections, Doesn't Amount to Abetment of Suicide: J&K High Court

Case Title: Kunti Devi Vs Neelam Devi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 105

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a wife attending calls from unknown numbers during the dead of night wouldn't constitute abetment of suicide under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Justice Sanjeev Kumar made this observation while dismissing a criminal revision petition filed by Kunti Devi, the mother of the deceased, Surinder Kumar, against the discharge of her daughter-in-law Neelam Devi from the case.

Mere Filing Of Representation Doesn't Extend Period Of Limitation Unless Any Action Is Taken : Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Mohd. Sadeeq vs State of J & K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 106

A single judge bench of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court comprising of Justice Sanjay Dhar while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of Mohd. Sadeeq vs State of J & K and Anr. held that mere filing of representations does not extend the period of limitation unless an action has been taken on those representations.

Stones Used For Pelting Can't Be Termed As “Dangerous Weapons” To Attract Culpability U/S 326 RPC: J&K High Court

Case Title: Jaswant Singh Vs State Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 107

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that stones used for pelting cannot, by any stretch of reasoning, be termed as a 'dangerous weapon' or 'an instrument' used for shooting to bring an accused within the meaning of section 326 Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) which deals with causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons.

Withholding Increments With Cumulative Effect Not Only Permanently Affects Salary Structure But Also Impacts Pension: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mysar Jan Vs J & K HANDICRAFTS & ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 108

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that when an employee faces the penalty of withholding or postponement of increments with cumulative effect, it permanently affects their salary structure and impacts pension benefits even after retirement.

Deficiency Of Not Submitting Application For Condonation Of Delay While Filing Appeal Is Curable, Such Application Can Be Made Subsequently: J&K High Court

Case Title: Gulshan Kumar Vs U.T. of Jammu & Kashmir

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 109

Reaffirming the rights of aggrieved parties to appeal against court decisions the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court established that a technical deficiency in an appeal, such as the absence of an application for condonation of delay, can be cured.

[BSF Rules 1969] Necessary For Competent Authority To Record Satisfaction Before Ordering Dismissal By Resorting To Rule 22(2)

Case Title: Naseer Ahmad Vs Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 110

Emphasising the paramount importance of adhering to procedural safeguards, particularly in cases concerning the dismissal of personnel from the Border Security Force (BSF) the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated the necessity of recording a satisfaction by the competent authority before resorting to Rule 22(2).

J&K Land Revenue Act | Financial Commissioner's Suo-Moto Power Conditional On Hearing, Can't Modify Orders Without Giving Opportunity To Parties: High Court

Case Title: Mst Khalida Vs Financial Commissioner (Revenue)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 111

Underlining the Financial Commissioner's power to exercise suo-moto revision in a land dispute case under the J&K Land Revenue Act 1996 the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that while the Commissioner has this authority, it cannot be used to bypass the principles of natural justice, which require a party to be heard before an order affecting their rights is reversed or modified.

Departmental Enquiry Can't Be Sustained Against Employee Once FIR On Same Set Of Allegations Already Stands Quashed: J&K High Court

Case Title: Jasvinder Singh Dua Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 112

Quashing departmental proceedings initiated against an employee, Jasvinder Singh Dua, Ex Managing Director (Under Suspension) of J&K Handicrafts (S&E) Corporation the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that once an FIR against an employee is quashed by the court, departmental inquiries based on the same set of allegations cannot be pursued.

High Court's Jurisdiction Under Article 226 Of Constitution Much Beyond Confines Of Mere Administrative & Executive Review: J&K High Court

Case Title: Rehmatullah Naik Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 113

Underscoring the expansive jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution of India the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the jurisdiction granted to Courts under the said Article is not restricted only to the review of the administrative actions and executive decisions of the State in the light of the extended applicability of the "doctrine of promissory estoppels".

Mere Participation In National Games, Regardless Of Position & Performance Does Not Guarantee Sports Quota In Educational Institutions: J&K High Court

Case Title: Suhaib Sahil Vs UT th. J&K Sports Council and ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 114

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that simply participating in National or International level sports competitions doesn't entitle a person to reservation under the J&K Sports Policy.

Citing various provisions of J&K Sports policy a bench of Justice Rajesh Sekhri clarified,

“A plain reading of clause 6.3.4, on first blush would indicate that mere participation or representation of a sportsperson at a National or International level shall make him entitled to reservation in University Academic/technical courses”.

Courts Have Discretion To Condone Delay Even Without Formal Application Under Section 5 Of Limitation Act: J&K High Court

Case Title: Sheikh Mohammad Sadiq (deceased) Through his Legal Representatives Vs Jammu & Kashmir Bank

Citation; 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 115

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court established that courts have the discretion to condone delay in bringing legal heirs on record, even without a formal application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

In upholding a trial court order of condoning delay without a formal application to that effect Justice M A Chowdhary observed,

“Although, it is the general practice to make a formal application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1963, in order to enable the Court or Tribunal to weigh the sufficiency of the cause for the inability of the appellant/applicant to approach the Court/Tribunal within the time prescribed by limitation, there is no bar to exercise by the Court/Tribunal, of its discretion, to condone delay in the absence of a formal application”.

'Antithetical To Public Interest': J&K High Court Modifies Interim Order Which Halted Construction Projects Having Implications On National Security

Case Title: M/s A L Construction Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 116

Vacating an interim order that had stalled key construction projects, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that judicial intervention in government contracts should be limited, prioritizing public interest.

The projects, including the construction of the IRP Battalion Headquarters in Kishtwar and the Anti-Corruption Bureau Office in Doda, were held up due to a dispute over the petitioner M/s A L Construction's work completion certificates.

Excess Salary Paid Due To Wrong Interpretation Of Rules Can't Be Taken Back From Retd Employee: J&K High Court Quashes Recovery Order

Case Title: Mst. Raja Vs State Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 117

Quashing a recovery order passed by the Srinagar Development Authority (SDA) directing a retired employee, Mohammad Ramzan Tantray, to return the excess amount paid due to a mistake in his pay scale upgrade the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that recovery of excess amount paid to an employee due to a mistake or wrong interpretation of rules cannot be made.

Pension Is A Property Under Article 31(1), Any Interference With It Violative Of The Constitution: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohammad Shafi Vs Union Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 118

Protecting the pension rights of a retired Sanitary Inspector the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that pension a hard-earned benefit which accrues to an employee, constitutes “property” under Article 31(1) and any interference will be a breach of Article 31(1) of the Constitution.

S.311 CrPC | Broad Wording Of Section Allowing "Any Court To Summon Witnesses At Any Stage" Of Proceedings, Should Not Be Restricted: J&K High Court

Case Title: FAROOQ AHMAD WANI Vs TARIQ AHMAD KHAN

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 119

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated the wide discretion a court has under Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) to ensure a just decision.

In a judgment passed by Justice Javed Iqbal Wani, the court emphasized that the broad wording of the section, allowing "any court" to summon witnesses "at any stage" of the proceedings, should not be restricted.

Section 313 CrPC Is A Safeguard In The Trial Process, Court Must Present Each Material Circumstance Separately To Accused: J&K High Court

Case Title: Ashok Kumar Vs State.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 120

Reiterated the importance of Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) as a vital safeguard for the accused in a fair trial the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court highlighted the trial court's duty to ensure the accused is informed of all incriminating evidence against them and is provided an opportunity to explain themselves.

“The purpose of putting material evidence distinctively and separately to the accused is to enable the accused to tender his explanation and if the incriminating evidence is not put in the manner aforesaid, then it amounts to condemning the accused unheard”, the bench comprising Justice Rajnesh Oswal observed.

Detailed Examination & Analysis Of Witness Statements Not Appropriate To Determine Merits Of Bail Application: J&K High Court

Case Title: Abdul Rashid & Ors Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 121

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that a detailed examination of witness statements is not permissible at the bail stage, especially when the charges involve serious offenses with severe punishments.

Rejecting the bail pleas of two men accused in the 2017 killing of two Special Police Officers (SPOs) in Doda district a bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

“There may be some contradictions and inconsistencies in their statements made during cross-examination, but it is not open to this Court to minutely examine and analyze their statements at the time of deciding the bail application of the petitioners”.

Detaining Authority Not Precluded From Issuing Preventive Detention Order Merely Because Individual Is Already Undergoing Trial: J&K High Court

Case Title: Rafaqat Ali Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 122

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a detaining authority is not precluded from issuing a preventive detention order merely because the individual is already undergoing trial for substantive offenses.

Dismissing the habeas corpus petition filed by Rafaqat Ali challenging his preventive detention under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (PITNDPS Act) Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

“.. merely because a person is undergoing trial in substantive offences, the detaining authority cannot be debarred from passing an order of preventive detention against him, if it is satisfied that such person is indulging in illicit traffic of drugs”.

J&K High Court Imposes ₹1 Lakh Penalty On Kashmir University For Wrongful Application Of Evaluation Statute

Case Title: Abdul Basit Vs University of Kashmir

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 123

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court imposed a penalty of ₹1 lakh on the University of Kashmir for wrongly and arbitrarily applying a statute, forcing a student to reappear for an examination he had already passed.

Invoking the Public Law Doctrine a bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed,

“.. the illegality and arbitrariness on the part of the respondents is manifest and writ large, besides being patently wrongful, undoubtedly constituting a fit case for grant of compensation in favour of the petitioner and the Court being conscious of the fact that there is no quantification based on actual loss, but then the award of damages to the petitioner payable by the Respondent-University is in Public Law”.

Concept Of “Necessary Party” In Writ Petition Is Far Broader Than In A Purely Civil Suit: J&K High Court

Case Title: Farooq Ahmad Sheikh Vs Tariq Ahmad Malik

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 124

Setting a precedent regarding who can be considered a "necessary party" in writ petitions the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the concept of a necessary party in a writ petition is far broader than in a purely civil suit.

Shedding light on a much broader application of Order 1 Rule 10(2) concerning writ petitions a bench of Justices Tashi Rabstan & M A Chowdhary observed,

“The Writ Court cannot keep itself confined merely to the litigants appearing before it or on the record available nor will it keep itself confined only to the lis before it, but will also take into account the consequences or the effect which the decision will have or is likely to have on the interests of others who may not be wholly necessary for decision of the issue at hand…Viewed from this angle, the concept of necessary party in a purely Civil Suit and a Writ Petition cannot be one and the same”

Civil Courts Must Notify Custodian Evacuees Property When Dealing With Evacuee Land Disputes: J&K High Court Clarifies

Case Title: Manzoor Hussain Vs Syed Mohsin Abbas

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 125

Clarifying the legal procedure for disputes concerning evacuee property the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that civil courts must notify the Custodian Evacuees Property when taking cognizance of a civil suit regarding evacuee property.

Not Mentioning Grant Of Bail In Detention Order Is Serious Lapse, Gives Rise To Inference Of Non-Application Of Mind: J&K High Court

Case Title: Owais Naseer Sheikh Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 126

Quashing a detention order the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has highlighted that the non-mention of the petitioner's bail status indicates a clear non-application of mind, rendering the detention order unsustainable in the eyes of law.

[S.126(1)(b) CrPC] Liberal Interpretation Of Term "Resides" Is Essential To Realise Its Legislative Objective: J&K High Court

Case Title: Masarat Jan Vs Fayaz Ahmad Parray

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 127

Prioritizing the legal convenience of destitute wives, neglected children, and abandoned parents in legal proceedings for maintenance the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised a liberal interpretation of the term "resides" in Section 126 Clause (1) (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

J&K High Court Directs Dept Action Against Commissioner Secretary For Barring Contractors Whose Relatives Were Involved In Anti-National Activities In Past

Case Title: Mohammad Shafi Malik Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 128

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a communication issued by the Commissioner/Secretary to Government, Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, which barred contractors from participating in tenders if their relatives were involved in anti-national activities in the past.

Absence Of Motive Becomes Less Significant When Prosecution Relies On Strong Eyewitness Account: J&K High Court

Case Title: Bhajan Singh Vs State Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 129

Underscoring the principle that the absence of a proven motive can be inconsequential if the eyewitness testimony is credible the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that the absence of motive becomes less significant when the prosecution relies on a strong eyewitness account.

First Court Holds Exclusive Jurisdiction Over Subsequent Arbitral Proceedings Under S.40 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act: J&K High Court

Case Title: ABDUL QADIR BHAT AND ANOTHER Vs M/S SHRI RAM TRANSPORT FINANCE Co.Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 130

Clarifying the scope of Section 42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that once an application concerning an arbitration agreement under Part I of the Act has been submitted before a court, that court exclusively possesses jurisdiction over all ensuing arbitral proceedings and related applications.

Lessee Cannot Be Allowed To Accept Beneficial Terms & Conditions Of Lease While Avoiding Terms Which Are Against His Interests: J&K High Court

Case Title: Abdul Rashid Zargar Vs Union Territory of J&K & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 131

Ruling against the selective acceptance of lease conditions by lessees the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a lessee cannot selectively accept only the favourable terms and conditions of a lease while rejecting the unfavorable ones.

“No Justification In Withholding Any Part Of Salary”: J&K High Court Directs Release Of Withheld Salaries For EDI Employees

Case Title: WASEEM AHAD AND OTHERS Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 132

Directing the release of withheld salaries of employees of the Jammu & Kashmir Entrepreneurship Development Institute (JKEDI) the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that allegations of irregularities in appointment or promotion cannot be a reason for withholding salaries of employees.

Every Erroneous Decision By Lower Court Not Amenable To Writ Of Certiorari, Only Patent Errors Can Be Corrected: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohammad Rafiq Rather Vs Sara Banoo

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 133

Underscoring the principle that every erroneous decision by a lower court cannot be challenged under Article 227 of the Constitution, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that this provision is meant to rectify only glaring errors apparent on the face of the record, not mistakes in factual assessment or legal interpretation.

FIR Can Be Elaborated Upon By Informant But Cannot Be Used To Create Fresh Charges Against Accused: J&K High Court Grants Bail To In-Laws Accused Of Gang Rape

Case Title: WASEEM AKRAM & ANR Vs UT OF J&K AND ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 134

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted bail to two men accused of gangrape, observing that the initial complaint in the First Information Report (FIR) can be elaborated upon by the informant, but this cannot be used to introduce new accusations or entirely new offenses against the accused.

Criminal Court Can Review Its Own Order At Notice Stage Under Domestic Violence Act: J&K High Court

Case Title: MUDASIR AHMAD DAR Vs. MST.MASHOOKA AND ANOTHER

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 135

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh clarified that the bar on a criminal court to review its own order does not apply at the stage when a notice is issued under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

J&K Land Revenue Act | Special Remedy U/S 121 Doesn't Extinguish Financial Commissioner's Power To Correct Mutation Errors Under Section 15: High Court

Case Title: Updesh Kour Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 136

Affirming the broad revisional powers of the Financial Commissioner under Section 15 of the J&K Land Revenue Act 1996 the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that the existence of a special remedy under Section 121 does not exclude the general revisional powers under Section 15.

Courts Can Scrutinise Grounds Of Detention To Ascertain Prima Facie Connection Between Grounds & Purpose Of Detention Order: J&K High Court

Case Title: Ghulam Mohi-ud-Din Lone Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 137

Asserting that Courts are not barred from examining the grounds of detention, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the Court has the authority to examine the grounds for detention and ensure a prima facie connection between the grounds and the purpose of the detention order.

O.8 R.1 CPC | Right Accruing In Favor Of Plaintiff Due To Non-Filing Of Written Statement Within Stipulated Time Can Be Waived: J&K High Court

Case Title: Chaman Lal Vs Sh. Mohd Sharief

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 138

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a plaintiff can waive the right to take advantage of a defendant's failure to file a written statement within the stipulated time.

Claimant Must Prove Subsisting Pre-Emption Right Until Passing Of Decree, In Any Other Cases Such Right Cannot Be Said To Subsist: J&K High Court

Case Title: Roop Singh Vs Pritam Singh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 139

Dismissing an appeal filed by a co-owner of land seeking pre-emption rights over the sale of the property by another co-owner the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that a claimant must possess a subsisting pre-emption right not only at the time of sale but also at the time of filing the suit and the passing of the decree by the trial court.

Prosecution Makes “Copy Paste” Arguments About National Security In UAPA Cases To Psychologically Influence Court: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title - Khursheed Ahmad Lone v. Union Territory

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 140

Justice Atul Sreedharan of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court cautioned against being unduly influenced by forceful submissions regarding internal security in the absence of judicially cognizable material against the accused.

“Voluntarily Participated In Selection Process”: J&K High Court Dismisses Plea Of Candidate Seeking Appointment Due To Lesser Applicants Than Advertised Posts

Case Title: Qurat-ul-ain Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 141

Dismissing an appeal by a candidate who sought a direct appointment to the post of despite fewer applicants than advertised posts the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that since she gladly and voluntarily participated in the selection process, hence estopped from challenging the selection procedure.