Nominal Index:

MOHAMMAD SHAHBAZ MIR VS UNION OF INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 175

Gorav Sayal Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 176

Ramtech Software Private Limited Vs Ut Of J&K And Another 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 177

Manzoor Ahmad Yatoo Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 178

Bansi Lal Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 179

Mehraj ud din Andrabi Vs Zia Darakshan 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 180

Yawar Ahmad Malik Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 181

Fayaz Ahmad Wani Vs Mst Hameeda 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 182

MAHANT GANESH DASS JI V/s STATE OF JK AND ANOTHER (REVENUE DEPARTMENT) 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 183

Rajinder Kumar and others Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 184

Shameem Ahmad Shah Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 185

Mohammad Sultan Najar Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 186

Nisar Ahmad Rather Vs Tahir Ahmad Reshi 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 187

State through Executive Engineer PHE Division, Doda Vs Sakina Begum 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 188

Din Mohd Vs Shokat Ali 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 189

Ghulam Mohiudin Lone Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 190

Surjeet Singh Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 191

M/s Tata Power Solar vs UT of J&K and Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 192

Union Of India Vs Ravinder Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 193

AIJAZ RASHID KHANDAY Vs STATE OF J&K AND OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 194

Syed Sareer Ahmad Andrabi Vs Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 195

LAKHBIR SINGH & ORS Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 196

MUJEEB UL ASHRAF DAR Vs MUSHTAQ AHMAD WANI 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 197

ABDUL MAJID KIRMANI & ANR. Vs BILAL AHMAD KIRMANI 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 198

Kamran Ali Khan Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 199

National Insurance Company Vs Zahoor Ahmad Sofi 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 200

JAVAID AHMAD KUMAR Vs UNION OF INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 201

Union Of India Vs M/s Onkar Nath Bhalla and Sons Contractor Pvt. Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 202

UT of J&K Vs M/s Hindustan Constructions Co. Limited and others 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 203

KAMRAN KHAN AND & ORS. Vs BILKEES KHANAM 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 204

Mubashir Manzoor Vs Mushtaq Ahmad Wani 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 205

Sandeep Vijh Vs State through Drug Inspector Baramulla 2024 (JKL) 206

Mehrajud Din Ganie and others Vs Mst. Mymoona and others 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 207

Mr. Nagraj V Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 208

BASHIR AHMAD WANI Vs J&K FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION & OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 209

Mohammad Akram Rather and Ors Vs UT through Director General of Police and Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 210

Gulzar Ahmad Malik Vs Tariq Ahmad Parray and another 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 211

Fayaz Ahmad Mir Vs Nighat Nasreen 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 212

Satya Prakash Arya Vs Syed Abid Jalali 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 213

Javeed Ahmad Sheikh and others Vs J&K Bank 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 214

Manju Bhat Vs Dr Amit Wanchoo Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 215

Abdul Rashid Bhat Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 216

MOHAMMAD ABDULLAH CHOWDHARY Vs J&K SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIES DEV. CORPORATION AND OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 217

Abdul Rashid Yatoo Vs Abdul Gani Malik 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 218

Nazir Ahmad Mir Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 219

Abdul Qayoom Mugloo Vs Irfana & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 220

Bashir Ahmad Sheikh Vs Mehran Ibn Bashir and Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 221

R6 Technologies Private Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 222

Abrar Ahmad Tantray Versus State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 223

Gautam Anand Vs Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 224

Dr Afaq Ahmad Khan Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 225

Hem Raj Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 226

Gourav Khajuria Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 227

Kirmania Model High School, Batwina, Ganderbal Versus Union Territory of J&K and others 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 228

National Investigation Agency Vs Abid Mushtaq Mir 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 229

Showkat Ali Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 230

Makhan Din V/s UT of J&K and another 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 231

ROSHAN LAL TICKOO Vs PREDIMANT KRISHAN TICKOO 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 232

Mst Hamida Banoo Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 233

Ahsan Ahmad Mirza Vs Directorate Of Enforcement 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 234

SYED TAJAMUL BASHIR Vs MOHAMMAD AYOUB KHAN 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 235

PERVAZ AHMAD PARRA Vs STATE OF J&K & ORS 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 236

GURMEET SINGH & ORS Vs DALGIT SINGH & OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 237

Ishfaq Ahmad Tramboo Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 238

Aabid Nazir Zargar Vs Mehrajudin Kakroo 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 239

Ashok Kumar Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 240

M/S Cube Construction Engineering Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 241

Ghulam Hassan Khanyari Vs Riyaz Ahmad Bhat 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 242

Hamid Mohd. Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 243

Kailash Nath Vs Mukul Raj 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 244

State of J&K Vs Parshottam Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 245

Abdul Rashid Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 246

Mohammad Amin Mir Vs University Of Kashmir 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 247

Mst Shameema Begum Vs Javid Iqbal Khan 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 248

Showkat Ahmad Rather Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 249

Kishore Kumar Vs Ishar Das 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 250

Narayan Sharma @ Shuna through Mrs. Lata Sharma (Mother) Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 251

Showkat Ahmad Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 252

Yashpal Sharma & Ors. Vs Rupali Sharma 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 253

Raman Kumar Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 254

Sheikh Owais Tariq Vs Satvir Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 255

Bharat Bhushan Jolly and ors Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 256

Rahees Hayat alias Ayaz Vs Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 257

State through P/S Pulwama Vs Nazir Ahmad Rather 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 258

Aqib Ahmad Renzu Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 259

Dr Tanveer Hussain Khan & Ors Vs Andleeba Rehman & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 260

Talib Hussain @ Javied Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 261

Ashraf Ali @ Shiffu Vs Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 262

Khursheed Ahmad Chohan VS UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 263

Sh. Vijay Sharma Vs U.T of Jammu and Kashmir 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 264

Shagufta Bano V/S UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 265

Zaffar Abbas Din Vs Nasir Hamid Khan 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 266

Satpal Sharma Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 267

Anju Khan Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 268

Kishan Tukaram Gavade Vs Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 269

Dr. Ashiq Hussain Factoo Vs State of J&K & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 270

Himashu Gupta Vs Sohani Ram 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 271

Judgments/Orders:

Employer Not Obligated To 'Launch Manhunt Across Globe For Absconding Employees': J&K High Court Upholds Dismissal Of CRPF Constable

Case Title: MOHAMMAD SHAHBAZ MIR VS UNION OF INDIA.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 175

Emphasising that an employer is not expected to launch a manhunt for an absconding employee across the globe the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the dismissal of a constable with the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), who had challenged his termination from service.

Case Diaries Must Be Made Available Immediately After Filing Bail Application To Facilitate Decisions From First Hearing Itself: J&K High Court

Case Title: Gorav Sayal Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 176

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that case diaries should be promptly available following the filing of bail applications to facilitate decisions on the first hearing itself.

Observing that bail applications should ideally be decided on the first date of hearing by this Court a bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan underscored,

“The same is possible only if the case diary is made available for the scrutiny by the Court on the very first date of hearing”.

Non-Response To Demands Invalidates Invocation of Mutual Negotiations Clause in Arbitration Agreements: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Ramtech Software Private Limited Vs Ut Of J&K And Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 177

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court bench of Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh held that if a party didn't respond to the demands and requests made by the other party, it can't invoke the part of the arbitration clause that such disputes and differences shall be an endeavoured to be resolved by mutual negotiations as a condition precedent for invoking the arbitration clause.

Authorities Obligated To Promptly Consider Detenu's Right To Representation Under Article 22 Of Indian Constitution: J&K High Court

Case Title: Manzoor Ahmad Yatoo Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 178

Quashing a preventive detention order the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court highlighted that the right to representation for a detenu is a guaranteed right under Article 22 of the Indian Constitution which imposes an obligation on authorities for its prompt consideration.

Delayed Trial, Violation Of Article 21 Rights: J&K High Court Grants Bail To Ex-Cop Accused Of Killing Man Falsely Projected As Terrorist

Case Title: Bansi Lal Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 179

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted bail to Bansi Lal, a 56-year-old former police officer, who had been in judicial custody for almost 18 years.

The order, passed by Justice Atul Sreedharan, highlighted the prolonged delay in the trial, describing it as a clear violation of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the right to a speedy trial.

Dismissal Of Complaint For Non-Prosecution Is Final Order, Magistrates Lack Inherent Powers To Restore Such Cases: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mehraj ud din Andrabi Vs Zia Darakshan

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 180

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh asserted that a Magistrate cannot exercise inherent jurisdiction to restore a complaint once dismissed due to the complainant's non-appearance.

A bench comprising Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul has declared that such dismissals are final orders, emphasizing the absence of any provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) that confers this power on the Trial Court.

Using “Security Of State” As Grounds To Detain Person In A Union Territory Is Valid Exercise Of Detaining Authority's Power: J&K High Court

Case Title: Yawar Ahmad Malik Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 181

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court affirmed that using "Security of State" as a ground for detaining a person in a Union Territory is a valid exercise of the detaining authority's power.

Dismissing an appeal against a single bench judgment that dismissed a habeas corpus plea a bench comprising Chief Justice N Kotiswar Singh and Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi explained,

“There is no doubt that the definition of State as contained in [Section 3 (58) of General Clauses Act, 1897] includes Union Territory. The term, “all local or other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India” comprises States and Union Territories”.

Comprehensive Proof Of Talak By Husband With Efforts For Reconciliation Is Essential To Avoid Maintenance Obligations: J&K High Court

Case Title: Fayaz Ahmad Wani Vs Mst Hameeda

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 182

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a husband cannot evade his obligation to maintain his wife merely by claiming to have divorced her.

Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul emphasized that the husband must not only prove the pronouncement of Talaak or the execution of a divorce deed but must also demonstrate that sincere efforts were made by both parties' representatives to reconcile their disputes. Failure of such efforts, without any fault of the husband, must be convincingly established.

Temple Properties Vest In The Deity: J&K High Court Directs Anantnag Deputy Commissioner To Take Over Management Of Two Temples

Case Title: MAHANT GANESH DASS JI V/s STATE OF JK AND ANOTHER (REVENUE DEPARTMENT)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 183

Aiming to ensure an effective and peaceful management of Shri Raghu Nath Mandir and Nagbal Gautam Nag Temple in Anantnag, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court directed the Deputy Commissioner (District Magistrate) of Anantnag to assume control over the management of these temples and their properties.

The directions to this effect were passed by a bench comprising Justices Sanjeev Kumar and M.A. Chowdhary, while addressing conflicting claims of management of these temples.

J&K High Court Cautions Against Routine Quashing Of FIRs On Settlement Between Parties, Cites Larger Effect On Society

Case Title: Rajinder Kumar and others Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 184

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court cautioned that an FIR and the consequent charge-report resulting from an investigation cannot be quashed routinely under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure merely because the parties have settled their differences.

Raising an alarm of watchfulness Justice Mohammad Yousuf Wani reasoned,

“In case the FIRs and the criminal cases culminating from the investigations are allowed to be quashed at the wish of the complainants and/or accused, the criminal justice system is likely to become a causality and the society at large will have to bear the consequences”.

Employees Appointed In Violation Of Articles 14 & 16 Can Be Disengaged Without Hearing: J&K High Court

Case Title: Shameem Ahmad Shah Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 185

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that employees appointed in contravention of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution can be disengaged without the necessity of affording them an opportunity to be heard.

S. 233 CrPC | Denying Accused's Right To Adduce Evidence Amounts To Denial Of Fair Trial: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohammad Sultan Najar Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 186

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled that denying an accused the right to adduce evidence constitutes a denial of a fair trial. The order overturned an earlier decision by the Fast Track Court POCSO, Srinagar, which had rejected the accused's application to summon defense witnesses.

O.37 R.3 CPC | Defendant Not Obliged To Apply For Leave To Defend Without Service of Summons: J&K High Court

Case Title: Nisar Ahmad Rather Vs Tahir Ahmad Reshi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 187

Quashing an ex parte judgment passed by the 4th Additional District Judge, Srinagar, in a case where the defendant was not served with a summons for judgment the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a defendant is only obligated to apply for leave to defend a suit after being served with a summons for judgment.

Principal Employer Liable To Compensate For Worker's Death Even If He Is Engaged Through Contractor: J&K High Court

Case Title: State through Executive Engineer PHE Division, Doda Vs Sakina Begum

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 188

Upholding the principles of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the principal employer is liable to compensate the accidental death of a worker engaged by a contractor.

Admissions Of Liability Made Outside Of Court Under Pressure Cannot Be Sole Basis To Determine Fact Of Issue: J&K High Court

Case Title: Din Mohd Vs Shokat Ali

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 189

Shedding light on significant aspects of civil procedure and the burden of proof in civil trials the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that admissions of liability made outside of court under pressure cannot be the sole basis for deciding a civil case.

FIR Not Appropriate Remedy For Addressing Disobedience Of Injunction Order, Recourse Under O.39 R.2A CPC Applicable : J&K High Court

Case Title: Ghulam Mohiudin Lone Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 190

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court declared that the appropriate approach to address the disobedience or breach of an injunction order is through Order 39 Rule 2-A of the CPC, rather than the registration of an FIR.

J&K High Court Imposes 10K Cost On DM Jammu For 'Unjustifiable' Preventive Detention Order

Case Title: Surjeet Singh Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 191

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh sharply criticized a preventive detention order issued under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978, and imposed a ₹10,000 fine on the District Magistrate Jammu, personally, citing "unjustifiable" grounds for the detention.

Disputes Predominantly Civil But Involving Elements Of Criminality Not Automatically Excluded From Arbitration: Jammu and Kashmir High Court

Case Title: M/s Tata Power Solar vs UT of J&K and Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 192

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court bench of Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh held that a dispute predominantly civil but involving elements of criminality is not automatically excluded from arbitration.

S. 67 NDPS Act | Additional Evidence Essential Before Acting Upon Co-Accused's Confession: J&K High Court

Case Title: Union Of India Vs Ravinder Singh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 193

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High High Court underscored the necessity of corroborative evidence alongside confessional statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act for the prosecution to establish a case against the accused.

Special Police Officers Don't Hold Civil Posts Regulated By Statutory Rules, Not Entitled To Service Conditions Of Regular Officers: J&K High Court

Case Title: AIJAZ RASHID KHANDAY Vs STATE OF J&K AND OTHERS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 194

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that Special Police Officers (SPOs) do not hold civil posts regulated by statutory rules and hence are not entitled to the powers, privileges, and protections relating to service conditions extended to regular police officers.

Drugs & Cosmetics Act | No Prosecution For Seeking Information U/S 18-A When It Is Already Available With Drug Inspector: J&K High Court

Case Title: Syed Sareer Ahmad Andrabi Vs Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 195

Quashing a criminal complaint under Section 18-A of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that once the information required under the Section is already available with the Drug Inspector, demanding the same from the non manufacturer/ agent becomes redundant, thereby rendering prosecution legally untenable.

Ocular Witnesses Not Expected to Have Photographic Memory, Minor Inconsistencies Must Be Ignored: J&K High Court

Case Title: LAKHBIR SINGH & ORS Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 196

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court underscored that ocular witnesses are not expected to possess photographic memories capable of recalling every detail of an incident.

The court emphasised that minor contradictions and inconsistencies in witness testimonies should be disregarded if they do not affect the material aspects of the case.

S.143A NI Act | Application Of Mind, Consideration Of Certain Factors By Magistrate Essential To Decide Quantum Of Interim Compensation: J&K High Court

Case Title: MUJEEB UL ASHRAF DAR Vs MUSHTAQ AHMAD WANI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 197

Quashing an order of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (1st Additional Munsiff), Srinagar, for granting interim compensation under Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act) the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised on the proper application of mind on part of the Magistrate to decide the interim compensation.

CPC | Nature Of Issues Crucial To Attract Applicability Of Section 10, Not Nature Of Relief Sought: J&K High Court

Case Title: ABDUL MAJID KIRMANI & ANR. Vs BILAL AHMAD KIRMANI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 198

Emphasising the importance of the nature of issues in civil suits the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that its not the nature of relief being sought but the nature of issues which are involved in the two suits that are crucial to attract applicability of Section 10 of the CPC.

Writ Petitions Do Not Lie Against Show Cause Notices Unless It Transcends Jurisdiction, Is Issued With Premeditated Mind: J&K High Court

Case Title: Kamran Ali Khan Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 199

Quashing an order of cancellation of a lease deed after issuing a premeditated show cause notice the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that a writ petition does not ordinarily lie against a show cause notice unless it is issued with a premeditated mind.

Employees Compensation Act | Admission Of Appeal Challenging Compensation Award Subject To Raising Substantial Questions Of Law: J&K High Court

Case Title: National Insurance Company Vs Zahoor Ahmad Sofi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 200

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the scope of an appeal against an award passed under the Employees Compensation Act is significantly limited, being permissible only if a substantial question of law is involved.

CRPF Rules | Essential To Establish Actual Service Of Notice To Delinquent Personnel Before Ordering Dismissal From Force: J&K High Court

Case Title: JAVAID AHMAD KUMAR Vs UNION OF INDIA

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 201

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that it is essential to establish proof of “actual service of notice” to delinquent personnel before ordering their dismissal from the force.

Arbitration Award Attains Status Of Civil Court Decree After Three Months If No Challenge Is Posed: J&K High Court

Case Title: Union Of India Vs M/s Onkar Nath Bhalla and Sons Contractor Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 202

Emphasising the significance of the amended Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, which allows for the enforceability of non-stayed awards the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that an arbitration award attains the status of a civil court decree after three months if no challenge is posed.

Any attempt To Modify Award Under Section 34 is not permissible: J&K High Court

Case Title: UT of J&K Vs M/s Hindustan Constructions Co. Limited and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 203

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court set aside a judgment from a subordinate court modifying an arbitral award while underscoring that under Section 34 of the J&K Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1997, courts lack the authority to modify arbitral awards and can only either uphold or set aside the awards.

[DV Act] Arrest Warrants Unjustified In Domestic Violence Cases Since Proceedings Are Civil In Nature: J&K High Court

Case Title: KAMRAN KHAN AND & ORS. Vs BILKEES KHANAM

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 204

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar while hearing a petition challenging the issuance of such warrants, observed that proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (DV Act) are inherently civil in nature and not criminal.

NI Act | Unless Accused Pleads Not Guilty, Interim Compensation U/S 143-A Cannot Be Granted: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mubashir Manzoor Vs Mushtaq Ahmad Wani

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 205

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed three orders passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar, awarding interim compensation to a complainant under Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act). The Court held that interim compensation can be granted only after the accused pleads not guilty to the accusation and the Magistrate applies his mind to relevant factors.

S.34 Drugs & Cosmetics Act | Proof Of Actual Responsibility Of Company At Time Of Offence Crucial To Attract Culpability: J&K High Court

Case Title: Sandeep Vijh Vs State through Drug Inspector Baramulla

Citation: 2024 (JKL) 206

Quashing a criminal complaint under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that not every person connected with the company may fall within the ambit of the provisions of section 34 of the Act of 1940.

Court Can Invoke Power Of Review To Correct Inadvertent Errors, Misrepresentation Even After Judgement Is Pronounced: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mehrajud Din Ganie and others Vs Mst. Mymoona and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 207

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that once a judgment is pronounced or an order is made, the court becomes “functus officio”, meaning it loses control over the matter, and the judgment or order becomes final, however, with the doctrine of review standing as an exception to this rule.

Bail Plea Of Man Who Ran Property Scam By Posing As Co-Producer Of 'Bahubali' Film

Case Title: Mr. Nagraj V Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 208

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed the bail application of Nagraj V., a self-proclaimed entrepreneur and industrialist, who has been embroiled in a Rs 1 crore scam involving fraudulent property transactions.

Leave Granting Authority Can Call For Second Medical Opinion Before Deciding On Genuineness Of Employee's Medical Leave: J&K High Court

Case Title: BASHIR AHMAD WANI Vs J&K FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION & OTHERS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 209

While setting aside an order treating the absence of an employee as unauthorised and directing for its regularization, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized that the competent authority has the option to secure a second medical opinion before concluding on the genuineness of medical leave.

Court's Inherent Powers Not Boundless, Expressions Such As 'Abuse Of Process' Or 'Securing Ends Of Justice' Don't Grant Unlimited Jurisdiction: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohammad Akram Rather and Ors Vs UT through Director General of Police and Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 210

Emphasising that the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) are not boundless the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that expressions such as “abuse of process of law” or “to secure the ends of justice” do not grant the High Court unlimited jurisdiction.

Proving Intent For Issuing Cheque Not Required U/S 138 NI Act, But Is Essential For Prosecution U/S 420 IPC: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Gulzar Ahmad Malik Vs Tariq Ahmad Parray and another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 211

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court delivered a judgment quashing a complaint against a petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 stating that the intent at the time of issuance of the cheque does not need to be proven for Section 138, whereas it is vital for Section 420 IPC.

Minor Staying With Father Cannot Be Termed Illegal Confinement, Not Proper To Assume Only Mother Is Important For Child: J&K High Court

Case Title: Fayaz Ahmad Mir Vs Nighat Nasreen

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 212

Underscoring the paramount importance of both parents in a child's life, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court severely reprimanded a magistrate for illegally ordering the custody of a minor child to the mother under Section 97 of the CrPC.

Defamatory Statements In Pleadings Or Petitions Amount To Publication Under Section 499 IPC: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Satya Prakash Arya Vs Syed Abid Jalali

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 213

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that defamatory statements made in court pleadings amount to publication and can form the basis for the prosecution of such client for an offence under Section 499.

"Creating False Equivalence & Illusion": High Court Orders Fresh Promotion Test For J&K Banking Associates, Declares Current Process Unfair

Case Title: Javeed Ahmad Sheikh and others Vs J&K Bank

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 214

Reiterating that inequals cannot be treated equally, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled the selection process for Banking Associates under the Seniority cum Selectivity channel to be illegal and arbitrary.

The court has further directed the J&K Bank to conduct a fresh eligibility screening test for the petitioners, who are non-IBPS Banking Associates.

Issuing Summons In Defamation Cases Cannot Be A Mechanical Exercise, Requires Proper Application Of Mind: J&K High Court

Case Title: Manju Bhat Vs Dr Amit Wanchoo

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 215

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has underscored the crucial role of magistrates in applying their minds judiciously before issuing processes in criminal complaints, especially those pertaining to defamation.

S.471 RPC | Fraudulent Use Of Forged Documents Is Punishable Even If Not Personally Forged By Accused: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Abdul Rashid Bhat Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 216

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that individuals can be held guilty under Section 471 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) for using forged documents as genuine, even if they did not personally forge the document.

Even Though Writ Petitions Have No Limitation Period, They Must Be Filed Within Reasonable Time: J&K High Court Dismisses Plea Filed After 26 Yrs

Case Title: MOHAMMAD ABDULLAH CHOWDHARY Vs J&K SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIES DEV. CORPORATION AND OTHERS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 217

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that filing representations on stale matters or those barred by limitation cannot create a fresh cause of action or revive a dead claim, even if these representations are considered by competent authorities or the Court directs their consideration.

Proceedings U/S 138 N.I. Act Justified In Cases Arising From Commercial Transactions Regardless Of Their Civil Nature: J&K High Court

Case Title: Abdul Rashid Yatoo Vs Abdul Gani Malik

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 218

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (N.I. Act) are justified in cases stemming from commercial transactions, regardless of the civil nature of the underlying transaction.

Dialogue Between Accused And Court Is Essential For Fair Trial: J&K High Court Sets Aside Conviction, Orders Retrial

Case Title: Nazir Ahmad Mir Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 219

Underscoring the importance of a robust dialogue between the accused and the court during a criminal trial the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that the non-compliance with JSection 342 (Pari Materia with Sec 313 of CrPC 1973) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) had prejudiced the accused and necessitated a retrial.

Past Cohabitation Sufficient To Establish Domestic Relationship Under Domestic Violence Act: J&K High Court

Case Title: Abdul Qayoom Mugloo Vs Irfana & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 220

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a domestic relationship under the Domestic Violence Act (DV Act), can be established through past cohabitation, and current cohabitation is not a requirement for the same.

Mother Being A Working Lady Does Not Absolve Father Of Maintenance Responsibilities Towards Children: J&K High Court

Case Title: Bashir Ahmad Sheikh Vs Mehran Ibn Bashir and Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 221

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a father is obligated to maintain his children, even if the mother is employed, reaffirming that a father's financial responsibilities towards his children remain intact irrespective of the mother's employment status.

'Unsuccessful Bidders Making Mountains Out Of Molehills': J&K High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Tender Of Rooftop Solar Schemes

Case Title: R6 Technologies Private Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 222

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a challenge to the Rooftop Solar Schemes (RTS) tender process. In a strong rebuke, the court rejected claims made by unsuccessful bidders who had exaggerated minor technical or procedural issues to justify judicial intervention.

Enterprises Engaged In Hazardous Activities Strictly Liable For Accidents: J&K HC Orders ₹20 Lakh Compensation For Youth Electrocuted By Transformer

Case Title: Abrar Ahmad Tantray Versus State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 223

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court reinforced the doctrine of strict liability in a ruling, emphasizing that enterprises engaging in hazardous or inherently dangerous activities are “strictly and absolutely” liable to compensate individuals harmed by accidents resulting from such activities.

"No Instances Of Encroachment": J&K High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Restoration Of Allegedly Encroached Land Belonging To Ancient Hindu Temples

Case Title: Gautam Anand Vs Union Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 224

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) alleging the encroachment of land belonging to ancient Hindu temples by the mafia and other property dealers.

Candidate Whose Appointment Is Delayed Due To Departmental Lapses Cannot Be Disadvantaged, Denied Promotion Eligibility: J&K High Court

Case Title: Dr Afaq Ahmad Khan Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 225

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a direct recruit whose appointment is delayed due to departmental laches cannot be denied retrospective appointment or promotion eligibility from the date on which other candidates from the same selection process were appointed.

Appellate Authority Must Consider Application For Condonation Of Delay Before Addressing Merits Of Time-Barred Appeal: J&K High Court

Case Title: Hem Raj Vs UT of J&K & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 226

Underlining a crucial procedural requirement regarding time-barred appeals, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh maintained that appellate authorities must first adjudicate applications for condonation of delay before addressing the merits of a time-barred appeal or the operation of an impugned order.

Drug Possession | Degree Of Evidence To Justify Preventive Detention Under PITNDPS Much Lower Than Other Detention Laws: J&K High Court

Case Title: Gourav Khajuria Vs UT of J&K

Citation :2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 227

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized that the degree of evidence required to justify preventive detention under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1998 (PITNDPS Act), is considerably lower than what might be needed under other detention laws.

"No Private Schools On State Land", J&K HC Grants Temporary Relief To 150 Private Schools Challenging Mandatory Land Regulations.

Case Title: Kirmania Model High School, Batwina, Ganderbal Versus Union Territory of J&K and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 228

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court on provided interim relief to over 150 private schools in the region. These schools had challenged a government order, S.O. 177 of 2022, which mandated obtaining a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Revenue Department to verify the legal status of the land used for educational purposes.

Juvenile Justice Act | Children's Courts Empowered To Try Offences Under UAPA, Welfare Of Child Paramount: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: National Investigation Agency Vs Abid Mushtaq Mir

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 229

Upholding the jurisdiction of the Children's Court to try cases under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), along with other laws, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court asserted that the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 [JJ Act] override all other statutes where a child in-conflict-with law is involved.

Clear & Unequivocal “Charge” Rather Than Mere Allegations Essential For Sustaining Preventive Detention Orders: J&K High Court

Case Title: Showkat Ali Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 230

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised the necessity of a clear and unequivocal charge rather than mere allegations for the sustainability of preventive detention orders.

A bench comprising Justices Atul Sreedharan and Puneet Gupta underlined that the grounds of detention must lay down the charge against the detinue that is precise, unequivocal and unambiguous.

Communicating Grounds For Detention In A Language Understood By Detenue Is A Constitutional Right: J&K High Court

Case Title: Makhan Din V/s UT of J&K and another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 231

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a detention order issued by District Magistrate Kathua, citing a failure in procedural compliance, specifically the communication of the grounds of detention in a language understood by the detenue.

Justice Sindhu Sharma, emphasizing the importance of this requirement, observed that “communication means imparting to the petitioner sufficient and effective knowledge of the facts and circumstances on which the order of detention is passed and such communication in such language which the petitioner understands.

Preliminary Enquiry U/S 340 CrPC Can Only Be Initiated In Interest Of Justice And In Relation To Court Proceedings: J&K High Court

Case Title: ROSHAN LAL TICKOO Vs PREDIMANT KRISHAN TICKOO

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 232

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that a preliminary enquiry under Section 340 of the Cr. P. C can only be initiated if it is expedient in the interests of justice, especially when there is an appearance of perjury committed in relation to court proceedings.

Deferring the consideration of an application seeking criminal proceedings for alleged false statements, due to the ongoing arbitration process Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

“.. It is not a case where the petitioner is stated to have made any contradictory statements in his pleadings but it is a case where he has made certain allegations, the veracity of which is yet to be determined… this Court feels that the prayer of the respondents/applicants for initiating preliminary enquiry under Section 340 of the Cr. P. C cannot be considered at this stage”

HC Directs Srinagar Dy Commissioner To Take Over Management Of Raghu Nath Ji Temple Land To 'Demarcate Boundaries' Amidst Claims Of Encroachment

Case Title: Mst Hamida Banoo Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 233

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court directed the Deputy Commissioner of Srinagar to take over the management of over 159 kanals of land belonging to the Raghu Nath Ji Temple in Barzulla Srinagar. The court also ordered the demarcation of the temple's land and the removal of any encroachments.

J&K High Court Quashes PMLA Charges Against Dr Farooq Abdullah In Alleged Cricket Association Scam

Case Title: Ahsan Ahmad Mirza Vs Directorate Of Enforcement

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 234

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh quashed the charge sheet filed against Dr Farooq Abdullah under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in the Jammu and Kashmir Cricket Association (JKCA) scam.

The Court ruled that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) cannot act as an appellate authority over the conclusions drawn by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), thereby setting a precedent on the limits of the ED's jurisdiction.

Lok Adalat Has No Power To Dismiss Cases for Non-Appearance Of Party: Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court

Case Title: SYED TAJAMUL BASHIR Vs MOHAMMAD AYOUB KHAN.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 235

Reinforcing the role and limitations of Lok Adalats, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that Lok Adalats do not possess the authority to dismiss a case for non-appearance of a party.

Justice Sanjay Dhar, while deciding a petition challenging an order of a Lok Adalat that dismissed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, observed that such action was beyond the purview of these alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.

Simply Because Judge Has Gone Wrong In Law No Grounds For Review, May Be A Ground For Appeal: J&K High Court

Case Title: PERVAZ AHMAD PARRA Vs STATE OF J&K & ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 236

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that an incorrect interpretation of law by a judge may be a ground for appeal but is not sufficient to justify a review of a judgment.

Dismissing a review petition which sought to overturn a previous court decision that upheld a termination from service Justice Sanjay Dhar has observed,

“Simply because a Judge has gone wrong in law, that is not a ground for review, though it may be a ground for appeal. Similarly, an erroneous view of law is no ground for review though it may be a ground for appeal. It seems that the petitioner in the guise of present review petition is trying to persuade this Court to rehear the case as if it is sitting in appeal over its own judgment, which is not permissible in law”

Court Must Scrutinize "Due Diligence" Undertaken By Parties Before Allowing Amendment Applications After Conclusion Of Trial: J&K High Court

Case Title: GURMEET SINGH & ORS Vs DALGIT SINGH & OTHERS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 237

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar underscored the importance of "due diligence" in determining the admissibility of amendment applications filed after the commencement of a trial.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar emphasized that while the power to allow amendments is broad, it is subject to the condition that the applicant demonstrates sufficient diligence in raising the matter before the trial commences.

Motor Vehicles Act Does Not Mandate Re-Registration Fee: J&K High Court Quashes 9% Tax Demand On Vehicle from Haryana

Case Title: Ishfaq Ahmad Tramboo Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 238

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh clarified that once a motor vehicle is registered upon payment of the prescribed fee under the Central Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, such registration is valid throughout India, and there is no provision for re-registration or the imposition of additional fees upon re-registration.

Rights Of Parties While Filing Suit Must Adapt To Significant Changes Which Occur During Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Aabid Nazir Zargar Vs Mehrajudin Kakroo

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 239

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that while the rights of parties are generally determined by the circumstances existing at the time of filing a suit, courts must also consider significant changes that occur during the litigation process to ensure just and equitable outcomes.

Criminal Justice System Must Not Be A Casualty Of Compromise: J&K High Court Flags Routine Quashing Of FIRs Based On Settlement Between Parties

Case Title: Ashok Kumar Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 240

Emphasising the critical role of the criminal justice system in upholding societal order the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that criminal cases should not be routinely dismissed merely on the basis of mutual settlements between parties, as this could potentially lead to the erosion of the justice system.

Admin Must Justify Execution Of Work Contract Without Necessary Sanction, Contractor Not Responsible For Verifying Approval: J&K High Court

Case Title: M/S Cube Construction Engineering Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 241

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh reiterated that it is not the contractor's responsibility to verify whether administrative approvals, technical sanctions, and other formalities are completed before undertaking any work.

O6 R7 CPC | Consideration For Amendment Of Plaint And Written Statement Stands On Different Footing: J&K High Court Explains

Case Title: Ghulam Hassan Khanyari Vs Riyaz Ahmad Bhat

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 242

Highlighting a crucial distinction in the legal process regarding amendments to pleadings the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that the consideration for the amendment of a Plaint and a Written Statement stands on different footings.

J&K Public Safety Act Cannot Be Used As Shortcut To Circumvent Due Process Established Under Code of Criminal Procedure: J&K High Court

Case Title: Hamid Mohd. Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 243

Quashing a preventive detention order the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court underscored that the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978 (PSA), cannot be wielded as a shortcut by preventive detention authorities to bypass the due process established under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC).

Article 227 Should Not Be Wielded Mechanically, Interference Must Be Restricted To Cases With Grave Legal Violations: J&K High Court

Case Title: Kailash Nath Vs Mukul Raj

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 244

Underlining the judicious exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized that such powers should not be wielded mechanically.

Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed that powers under the article should be reserved for instances where there is an absence of evidence to justify a finding, where a finding is so perverse that no reasonable person could arrive at the same conclusion, or where there is a grave illegality or flagrant violation of a fundamental principle of law, necessitating judicial interference.

Deficiency To Prove Safe Custody And Timely Submission Of Contraband Samples Can Render Prosecution's Version Doubtful: J&K High Court

Case Title: State of J&K Vs Parshottam Singh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 245

Upholding the acquittal of two individuals accused under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court underscored the prosecution's obligation to demonstrate that the contraband was kept in safe custody and that samples were forwarded to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) without delay.

Prosecution Case Not To Be Doubted If Offending Weapon Not Found: J&K High Court Upholds Life Sentence In 31-Yr-Old Murder Case

Case Title: Abdul Rashid Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 246

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the life imprisonment sentence in a 1993 murder case, stressing that the absence of a proven weapon does not automatically render the prosecution's case suspicious.

A bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice Puneet Gupta observed,

"Even if the gun purported to have been used in the occurrence is not proved in a given case or where the weapon of offence is itself not found, it does not mean that the prosecution case is to be viewed with suspicion in all circumstances."

J&K CCA Rules 1956 | Forfeiture Of Increment Is A Major Penalty Due To Permanent Pay Reduction, Requires Detailed Enquiry Under Rule 33: High Court

Case Title: Mohammad Amin Mir Vs University Of Kashmir

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 247

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar declared that the forfeiture of increments is a major penalty, necessitating a comprehensive departmental enquiry under Rule 33 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1956 (CCA Rules).

DV Act | No Need For Trial To Grant Interim Residence Order, It Is An Urgent Relief To Protect Woman From Taking Shelter On Road: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mst Shameema Begum Vs Javid Iqbal Khan

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 248

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that a Magistrate, while considering an interim residence order under the Domestic Violence Act (DV Act), is not required to conduct a full trial but only needs to be satisfied with the application filed by the aggrieved person.

[RPC 498A] Mere Demand For Dowry Not Cruelty In Absence Of Persistent Harassment: J&K High Court

Case Title: Showkat Ahmad Rather Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 249

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a simple demand for dowry, without consistent harassment aimed at coercing the victim to meet such demands, does not constitute "cruelty" under Section 498-A of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC).

Wrong Description Of Property In Non-Mortgage Suits Not Grounds For Dismissal Under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC: J&K High Court Clarifies

Case Title: Kishore Kumar Vs Ishar Das

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 250

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh clarified that under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), a suit cannot be dismissed merely due to the improper or incorrect description of immovable property, except in cases involving mortgage suits.

A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani emphasized that this requirement is not mandatory in other suits, thereby offering crucial clarity on the interpretation of this provision.

Preventive Detention Can Be Ordered Irrespective Of Ongoing Or Concluded Criminal Proceedings: J&K High Court

Case Title: Narayan Sharma @ Shuna through Mrs. Lata Sharma (Mother) Vs UT of J&K

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 251

Upholding the validity of a preventive detention order the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reaffirmed that preventive detention can be ordered irrespective of ongoing or concluded criminal proceedings.

The court emphasized that such detention may occur “before, during, or after prosecution, with or without prosecution, and even after discharge or acquittal,” making it clear that preventive detention serves a distinct purpose from punitive measures in criminal law.

S.113A Evidence Act | Wife's Suicide Within Seven Years Of Marriage Doesn't Automatically Trigger Presumption Of Abetment Against Husband: J&K HC

Case Title: Showkat Ahmad Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 252

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that the mere fact that a woman commits suicide within seven years of her marriage does not automatically invoke the presumption under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act. Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872 deals with the presumption of suicide abetment by a husband or relative of a married woman.

[Defamation] Application Claiming Exception Of 'Good Faith Accusation' Cannot Be Dismissed At Threshold, Requires Trial To Examine: J&K HC

Case Title: Yashpal Sharma & Ors. Vs Rupali Sharma.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 253

In a notable ruling, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized that the application of the Eighth Exception to Section 499 (Defamation) of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) (pari materia to Sec 499 of IPC) involves the determination of factual issues that cannot be assessed at the threshold stage by the trial court or in a petition seeking quashing.

Embargo On Bail In Death Or Life Imprisonment Cases Cannot Supersede Right To Speedy Trial: J&K High Court

Case Title: Raman Kumar Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 254

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the embargo under the Code of Criminal Procedure for granting bail in cases punishable by death or life imprisonment cannot override the fundamental right to a speedy trial, as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Granting bail to one Raman Kumar, the petitioner, who had been incarcerated for over 13 years without his trial being concluded a bench of Justice Rajnesh Oswal observed,

“While considering the bar for grant of bail in offences punishable with death or life imprisonment, a proper balance is required to be maintained to ensure that the right of the accused to Speedy Trial is not violated”.

[S.138 NI Act] Complaint Is Maintainable Even If Cheque Is Dishonoured Due To 'Frozen Account': J&K High Court

Case Title: Sheikh Owais Tariq Vs Satvir Singh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 255

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, is maintainable even if a cheque is dishonoured with the reason 'Account Frozen'.

Justice Rajnesh Oswal, hearing the matter, examined whether the complaint for dishonour of a cheque on the ground of 'Account Frozen' is maintainable under Section 138 of the Act.

CrPC | Test Of Sufficiency Of Proof Not Applicable At Stage Of Framing Of Charge And Discharge Of Accused: J&K High Court

Case Title: Bharat Bhushan Jolly and ors Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 256

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reaffirmed that the stringent tests regarding the sufficiency of proof, which are usually applied at the final stage of a case, are not applicable during the framing of charges or discharge of an accused.

Habeas Corpus Petitions Can't Be Allowed To Become Infructuous Due To Pendency Outlasting Period Of Detention: J&K High Court

Case Title: Rahees Hayat alias Ayaz Vs Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 257

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a habeas corpus writ petition cannot be dismissed solely because the period of preventive detention has expired during the pendency of the case. The court emphasized that allowing the petition to lapse on this ground would undermine the rule of law and suggest that personal liberty is restored merely by the passage of time, rather than through enforcing rights.

Presumptions Under NDPS Act Are Rebuttable Not Absolute, Prosecution Must First Establish Prima Facie Case: J&K High Court

Case Title: State through P/S Pulwama Vs Nazir Ahmad Rather

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 258

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court while upholding the acquittal of three individuals accused under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act), 1985 ruled that the presumptions under Sections 35 and 54 of the NDPS Act are rebuttable, not absolute.

The court emphasised that the prosecution must first establish a prima facie case against the accused before the burden shifts to the defense.

Bail In Criminal Cases No Justification For Preventive Detention: J&K High Court Quashes Detention Order Against Ex-SMC Corporator

Case Title: Aqib Ahmad Renzu Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 259

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed the preventive detention order issued against former Srinagar Municipal Corporation (SMC) Corporator Aqib Ahmad Renzu.

The court held that the mere fact that Renzu had been granted bail in multiple criminal cases did not justify his detention under preventive law. The court further emphasized that preventive detention laws cannot be used as a substitute for handling cases under regular criminal law.

Proceedings U/S 12 DV Act Not Strictly Criminal In Nature, Bar Preventing Magistrates From Revoking Their Own Orders Is Not Applicable: J&K HC

Case Title: Dr Tanveer Hussain Khan & Ors Vs Andleeba Rehman & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 260

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that proceedings under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (D.V. Act) are not strictly criminal in nature. Consequently, the bar preventing Magistrates from revoking or cancelling their own orders is not applicable in these cases, it added.

Casualness By Authorities In Passing Detention Order Mocks Constitution: J&K High Court Quashes Detention Of Zee News Urdu Bureau Chief

Case Title: Talib Hussain @ Javied Vs UT of J&K Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 261

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed the preventive detention of Talib Hussain, Bureau Chief of Zee News Urdu, remarking that the "casualness and callousness" shown by the authorities in passing mechanical detention orders mocked the Constitution of India.

J&K High Court Pulls Up DM Over 'Illegal' Detention Order, Says Deprivation Of Liberty Was Treated As “Administrative Excursion”

Case Title: Ashraf Ali @ Shiffu Vs Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 262

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court strongly criticised the District Magistrate of Udhampur for issuing an unlawful preventive detention order under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978. The court found the detention order to be arbitrary and a violation of the petitioner's fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Letters Patent Appeal Not Maintainable Against Single Judge Order In Article 226 Plea Which Has 'Trappings Of Criminal Case': J&K High Court

Case Title: Khursheed Ahmad Chohan VS UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 263

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court declared that a Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) is not maintainable against an order passed by a Single Judge in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, especially when the petition has the trappings of a criminal case.

Courts Cannot Review Threat Perception Assessments, Such Evaluation Falls Under Security Agencies' Domain: J&K High Court

Case Title: Sh. Vijay Sharma Vs U.T of Jammu and Kashmir

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 264

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that it has no mechanism to determine whether the threat perception of individuals or political figures has been properly assessed, emphasizing that such evaluations are strictly within the jurisdiction of security agencies.

Law Does Not Permit Discrimination Between Foreigner And Indian Nationals While Granting Bail: J&K High Court

Case Title: Shagufta Bano V/S UT of J&K Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 265

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reaffirmed that the law does not allow any discrimination between foreign nationals and Indian nationals regarding the granting of bail, emphasizing that bail must be considered based on the facts and circumstances of each case, and conditions may be imposed to ensure the accused is available for trial, but bail cannot be denied simply because the accused is a foreign national.

High Court Retains Original Civil Jurisdiction Despite Changes Introduced Post-2019 Re-Organisation Act: J&K High Court

Case Title: Zaffar Abbas Din Vs Nasir Hamid Khan

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 266

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reaffirmed that despite the de-operationalization of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir, 1957, and the enactment of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019, the court retains both ordinary original civil jurisdiction and extraordinary original civil jurisdiction.

'Pollutes Stream Of Justice': J&K High Court Imposes 50K Cost On Petitioner For Suppressing Material Facts

Case Title: Satpal Sharma Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 267

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court remarked that "a litigant who attempts to pollute the stream of justice or touches the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands, is not entitled to any relief, interim or final." The court imposed a hefty cost of ₹50,000 on the petitioners for deliberately suppressing material facts in an attempt to obtain interim relief.

Inability By State's Police Machinery To Take Recourse Under Ordinary Criminal Law Not An Excuse To Invoke Preventive Detention: J&K High Court

Case Title: Anju Khan Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 268

Quashing the preventive detention of 25-year-old Anjun Khan, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court denounced the misuse of the Public Safety Act (PSA) as a means to bypass ordinary criminal law. The court has emphasised that the inability of the State's police machinery to resort to normal legal procedures could not justify invoking the draconian PSA.

No Interference In Punishment Unless It Shocks Conscience: J&K High Court Upholds Dismissal Of BSF Personnel For 2-Yr Unauthorized Absence

Case Title: Kishan Tukaram Gavade Vs Union Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 269

Upholding the dismissal of a BSF constable for overstaying his leave by nearly two years the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reinforced the principle that, unless the punishment shocks the court's conscience, the proportionality of punishment should not be interfered with.

Reformative Theory Takes Back Seat In Heinous Terrorist Crimes: J&K High Court Dismisses Remission Plea Of Separatist Ashiq Hussain Factoo

Case Title: Dr. Ashiq Hussain Factoo Vs State of J&K & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 270

Dismissing the remission plea of Kashmiri separatist and Hizbul Mujahideen militant, Ashiq Hussain Factoo, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that heinous crimes like terrorism are a class apart and warrant a stricter approach.

The Division Bench, comprising Justices Sanjay Dhar and M.A. Chowdhary, declared that the reformative theory of punishment must yield in cases involving terrorist crimes, particularly in regions like Jammu and Kashmir, where militancy has been rampant for over three decades.

Proceedings U/S 145 CrPC Not A Substitute For Recovering Possession Of Property: J&K High Court

Case Title: Himashu Gupta Vs Sohani Ram

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 271

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that proceedings under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) cannot be used as a means to recover possession of a property, when the dispute concerns the title of the property.