Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup December 11 - December 17, 2023

Asif Sultan Saida Vs Union Territory of J&K and anr 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 312

Dr. Sandeep Mawa Vs U.T. of Jammu & Kashmir 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 313

Inderjeet Khajuria Vs State Of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 314

Bari Shah Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 315

Jamsheed Haroon and Another 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 316

SMT. RANJEET KOUR Vs. STATE OF J&K & ORS 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 317

S. Saroop Singh Vs Union of India through Defence Secretary 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 318

Shafakat Vs Jammu and Kashmir Bank through its Chairman 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 319

Sulabh International Social Service Organization Vs Saral Sugam Sewa Society 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 320

Judgments/Orders:

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Quashes Detention Order of Journalist Asif Sultan Citing Procedural Lapses

Case Title: Asif Sultan Saida Vs Union Territory of J&K and anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 312

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed the detention order of journalist Asif Sultan, who was detained under the Public Safety Act (PSA) in April 2022.

The court, in its judgment delivered by Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul, observed that the detention order was illegal and unsustainable as the detaining authority failed to provide Sultan with all the relevant material on which the order was based. This, according to the court, violated Sultan's rights under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and Section 13 of the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978.

J&K High Court Closes 'Vague' PIL Seeking CBI Probe Into Appointment Of 'Special Police Officers' In J&K Police

Case Title: Dr. Sandeep Mawa Vs U.T. of Jammu & Kashmir.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 313

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court closed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the appointment of Special Police Officers (SPOs) as Constables in the J&K Police Department between 2018 and 2020.

The bench comprising Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi observed that the petitioner's allegations were vague and lacked proper disclosure of credentials. Despite granting time on multiple occasions for filing a better affidavit, the petitioner failed to comply.

'Adequate Steps Taken': J&K High Court Closes PIL Concerning Contamination Of Tawi River In Jammu, Creation Of Artificial Lake

Case Title: Inderjeet Khajuria Vs State Of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 314

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has closed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed on the contamination of the Tawi River in Jammu and the creation of an artificial lake. The bench comprising Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi said that enough adequate steps have already been taken by the respondents and, therefore, there is no reason to further monitor the case.

'Gap Of 3.5 Yrs Between Last 'Illegal' Activity & Detention Order': J&K High Court Quashes Detention Of Alleged Bovine Smuggler

Case Title: Bari Shah Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 315

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has quashed the detention order of a man accused of bovine smuggling, citing a lack of live link between his alleged past activities and the present detention, and a long delay of over three and a half years in passing the order.

Justice Rajnesh Oswal also acknowledged the Detenue's willingness to furnish an undertaking with the District Magistrate of Rajouri, assuring that he would not indulge in any bovine smuggling activity in the future.

J&K High Court Quashes FIR For Offence of Triple Talaq Owing To Compromise Between Parties

Case Title: Jamsheed Haroon and Another

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 316

Upholding the power of compromise in matrimonial disputes, the Jammu & Kashmir High Court has quashed an FIR filed under the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, for the offence of triple talaq. Justice Sindhu Sharma, in a nuanced order, recognised the settlement reached between the couple and the potential for further injustice if the criminal proceedings continued.

“In view of the fact that the parties have mutually settled the dispute and to discharge/ release the parties from this dilemma, there is no reason to keep the FIR pending between the parties”, Justice Sharma recorded.

Res Judicata| Contempt Court Sole Authority To Rule On Judgment Adherence, Subsequent Litigation On Same Issue Impermissible: J&K High Court

Case Title: SMT. RANJEET KOUR Vs. STATE OF J&K & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 317

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh determined that the Contempt Court possesses the authority to adjudicate on whether a judgment of the Court has been adhered to. Once the Contempt Court has rendered a decision on the merits of such a question, it is not permissible for a party to reintroduce the same issue in a subsequent lawsuit or any other proceeding.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar has observed,

“The Contempt Court is competent to decide an issue as to whether or not judgment of the Court has been complied with and once such a question has been decided on merits by the Contempt Court, it would not be open to a party to raise the same issue in a subsequent suit or any other proceeding as the same would be barred under Section 11 read with Explanation (VIII) of the Civil Procedure Code”.

J&K High Court Directs UOI To Pay 2.5 Crores As Rental Compensation To Displaced Persons Whose Land Was 'Illegally' Occupied By Indian Army

Case Title: S. Saroop Singh Vs Union of India through Defence Secretary.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 318

Upholding the Constitutionality of property rights, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court directed the Union of India to pay a staggering Rs. 2.49 crore in rental compensation to 24 families of Displaced Persons (DPs) whose land was illegally occupied by the Army for over four decades.

A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed,

“The state in exercise of its power of “Eminent Domain‟ may interfere with the right of property of a person by acquiring the same but the same must be for a public purpose and therefore, reasonable compensation must be paid. In a democratic polity governed by the rule of law, the Union of India could not have deprived the petitioners of their property without the sanction of law and it is obligatory on part of the Union to comply with the procedure for acquisition, requisition or any other permissible statutory mode”.

Maternity Leave Doesn't Result Or Reduction In Total Service Rendered: J&K High Court Upholds 6 Bankers' Promotion Rights

Case Title: Shafakat Vs Jammu and Kashmir Bank through its Chairman.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 319

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that while on an approved leave of any nature, whether maternity leave or otherwise, any employee is to be considered as being in active service.

Justice Sanjeev Kumar clarified that the act of taking leave, irrespective of its kind, does not constitute a break in service nor does it lead to a reduction in the overall length of service rendered by the employee by the duration of the leave taken.

'Can't Stall Public Importance Projects Halfway': J&K High Court Upholds Sanitation Contracts To Sulabh Int'l Society Sans Inviting Tenders

Case Title: Sulabh International Social Service Organization Vs Saral Sugam Sewa Society

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 320

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the allotment of sanitation contracts to a renowned NGO, Sulabh International Social Service Organization (SISSO), without inviting tenders.

A division bench of Justices Tashi Rabstan and Rahul Bharti has observed that the allotment of contracts is not always bound by a tendering process and can be granted through negotiations, considering the organisation's attributes and qualifications.