Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 2 - September 8, 2024

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

Judgments/Orders:

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.

Setting aside an order passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Kupwara, who had wrongly interpreted the scope of the DV Act, Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

“Section 23 of the DV Act gives power to a Magistrate to pass an interim order of the nature as provided in the said provision. Residence order is an urgent relief to protect a woman from her taking shelter on road. Therefore, passing of an interim order of the nature as defined under Section 19 of the Act is well within the jurisdiction of a Magistrate”.

[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).

Setting aside a conviction under Sec 498-A Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed,

“Though, there was complaint by the deceased about the demand of scooter and cash being made by the appellant and his parents, there is nothing in the evidence to suggest that for not meeting the demand of dowry, the deceased was ever beaten, abused or turned out from the matrimonial home. Rather, the evidence is that she had been quietly living in her matrimonial home”

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.