Raja Sajad Ahmad Wan Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 151

M/s Best Crop Science Industrial Area Versus Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 152

Mahant Subash Shah Vs Kabir Singh & Anr 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 153

State of J&K Vs Davinder Kumar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 154

State (now UT) of J&K Vs Bashir Ahmad 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 155

Shukal Singh Vs v/s G.M., Jammu Co-Operative Wholesale Ltd.& Anr 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 156

M/S Shaf Sons through Gowhar Ahmad Mir & Another Vs Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 157

Mohammad Sultan Nagoo vs Custodian Evacuee Property and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 158

Ravinder Singh Vs J&K Sports Council 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 159

Naseema Begum Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 160

Chajju Singh Bharat Bhushan Gupta Vs Subash Aggarwal and others Chajju Singh and ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 161

Mst Jana Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 162

Mohd Sharief and others Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 163

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Subash Chander Vs Subash Chander and others. National Insurance Company Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 164

State of J&K Vs Sham Lal 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 165

M/s Ali Shah through Arif Ahmad Shah Versus Union of India and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 166

Monica Pathania Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 167

M/S VJ Jindal Cocoa Pvt. Ltd Vs Union of India and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 168

Union Of India Vs Altaf Ahmad Mir 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 169

State of J&K Vs Gulji Bhai & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 170

State of J&K Vs Rajinder Kumar 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 171

M/s Delton Infra Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of J&K and another 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 172

Sh. Krishan Singh Jasrotia (deceased) represented through LRs Bimla Devi and others Vs Union of India and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 173

State of J&K Vs Tariq Hussain 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 174

Raman Masih Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 175

Ashfaq Ahmed Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 176

Chand Devi Vs Sonam Choudhary 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 177

United India Insurance Vs Sajjad Hussain 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 178

National Insurance Company Ltd. thr. Its Divisional Manager and Anr Vs M/S Rash Builders Civil Contractors and Suppliers thr. its Manager 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 179

Bilal Ahmad Ganaie Vs Sweety Rashid & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 180

Abid Hussain Ganie Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 181

Abid Ahmad Ganai Vs UT of J&k & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 182

Yatin Yadav Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 183

Mohd. Abdullah Vs Manager, Trumboo Cement Industry Limited and Another 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 184

National Insurance Company Limited Vs Mst. Aisha Bano & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 185

Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise Vs Krishi Rasayan Exports Pvt. Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 186

Mohammad Yousuf Allie Vs High Court of JK Th. its Registrar General & Anr 2023 LiveLaw(JKL) 187

Ishfaq Tantray Vs Khalid Jahangir, Chairman Service Selection Board 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 188

Hazik Wangnoo Vs Ut of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 189

The Commissioner of Income Tax v/s The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 190

Sanjay Sharma Vs UT ofJ&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 191

Subash Chander Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 192

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S The J&K Bank Ltd. 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 193

Khalid Amin Kohli Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 194

Raj Kumar Gupta Vs Bank of India & Ors 2023 LiveLaw(JKL) 195

Mohhamd Rafiq Khan Vs PNB 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 196

Abdul Rashid Wani Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 197

Raj Ali and Others Vs Union Of India & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 198

Ghulam Rasool Sofi Vs State Of J&k 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 199

Mohammad Younis Mir Vs Union Territory of J&K & Anr 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 200

Ravinder Kumar Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 201

Shahbaz Ahmad Palla 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 202

Yoginder Singh Vs Union Of India 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 203

Imran Nabi Wani Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 204

State Of J&K Vs Shailender Singh 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 205

Bijay Oraon Vs Union Of India 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 206

Zahoor Ahmad Wani Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 207

Abdul Rashid Bhat Vs Finanacial Commissioner 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 208

Shahnawaz Ahmad Vs Union Of India 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 209

Mudasir Nazir Vs University Of kashmir 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 210

State Of J&K vs Narayan Dutt 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 211

Abdul Hameed Ganie @ Dr.Hameed Fayaz vs. State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 212

Sarwa Begum and Ors. (LRs of Late Shabir Ahmad Dar) Vs State of J&K and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 213

Jammu and Kashmir National Conference through its General Secretary Ali Mohammad Sagar Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 214

MANAGING DIRECTOR JK HANDICRAFTS Vs AGA SYED MUSTAFA & ANR 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 215

Aamir Javid Waza and ors. Vs Gousia Jan and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 216

MOHAMMAD ASHRAF RESHI Vs STATE OF J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 217

Abdul Rashid Dar and others Vs Ghulam Qadir Dar and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 218

Inder Jeet Singh Vs ICICI Lombard and another 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 219

Vishwakarma Gun Works Vs Industrial Tribunal Court and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 220

BR (name redacted) Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 221

Vinod Kumar and Others v. State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 222

IRSHAD AHMAD QURESHI & ANR Vs. STATE OF J&K & OTHERS 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 223

Gul Mohammad and Ors Vs State of J&K and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 224

Noor Illahi Fakhtoo vs UT of J&K and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 225

Surjeet Singh Vs Sheikh Behzad Khalid & others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 226

Nazir Ahmad Ganie and Another Vs Mohammad Amin Ganie 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 227

Haseena Akhter Vs. Union Territory of J&K & Anr 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 228

Mian Khan and Others Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 229

Mohammad Amin Wani vs. UT Of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 230

Gupta Modern Breweries Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 231

Tawqeer Bashir Magray Vs. Union Territory of J&K & Anr 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 232

M/S CADILA HEALTH CARE LTD. Vs PRESIDING OFFICER & ANR 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 233

SSP Kathua Vs Baghwan Das 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 234

BOCA Jammu Vs Nageen Ara 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 235

State of J&K and others Vs Smt. Manjeet Kour and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 236

Vinkal Sharma and others V/s UT of J&K and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 237

Happy Singh vs. Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 238

SHAH MASOOD AHMAD AND ANR vs. SHAH SHABIR AHMAD 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 239

BILLO KASANA & OTHERS Vs STATE OF J&K & ORS 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 240

Noor Ahmad Shah vs. Union of India and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 241

MOLVI AB. RASHID SHEIKH Vs U T OF J&K & Anr. ..Mushtaq Ahmad Bhat @ Veeri V/s Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 242

Brij Bhushan Sharma vs. State Of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 243

Mst. Raja Vs.Mst. Fazi and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 244

Sajad Ahmad Mir V/s Mukhtair ul Qadir 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 245

Mohammad Rafiq Mir Vs Mohamad Bhat 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 246

Intizamiya Committee Dargah and Anr v. Union Territory of J&K and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 247

Nikhil Sharma Vs State of J&K and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 248

Abdul Rashid Dar vs. UT Of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 249

Brij Mohan Sawney Vs Sanjeev Kumar Gupta 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 250

Dilshad Sheikh & Ors vs Sabha Sheikh 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 251

Bashir-Ud-Din Vs UT Of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 252

Hotel Ashai Srinagar & Ors. Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 253

Ama Teli V/s Manzoor Ahmad Bhat and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 254

Sheikh Abdul Majeed Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 255

Mridulla Kirti Vs High Court of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 256

MAQSOOD AHMAD SHOOSHA Vs. STATE OF J&K &OTHERS 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 257

Kirti Mridulla Vs J&K High Court 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 258

Abdul Majeed Dar alias Madnee Vs UT of Jammu and Kashmir & others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 259

Union Territory of J&K Vs Abdul Qayoom Bhat 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 260

Ab. Hamid Bhat Vs Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 261

Ghulam Din Bhat and another Vs Mst Jana 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 262

Tabeen Mineral Water Private Limited Vs National Insurance Company Limited 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 263

Court On Its Own Motion Vs Comm. Secy. Govt. of JK Tourism and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 264

Nikhat Nabi v M/s Fancy Fabrics & Ors (J&K Bank Ltd) 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 265

G. M. Bhat v State of JK 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 266

Chief Engineer PWD Kashmir Vs Fahmeeda Begum 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 267

Shakeel Ahmad Kuchay Vs. Manmohan Lal 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 268

Naveen Bhatnagar vs M/s Sudarsham Consolidated Limited 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 269

CRP FOOD IMPORT-EXPORT v. KASHMIR KESAR MART 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 270

Rajan Gupta V/s Manoj Gupta 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 271

Fayaz Ahmad Wani Vs Union Territory of J&K and ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 272

Shamsher Singh Manhas V/s State of J&K and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 273

Jagdish Chander Vs Union Of India 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 274

M/S Ali Shah Versus Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 275

FAROOQ AHMAD LONE Vs STATE OF J&K & OTHERS 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 276

Khursheed Ahmad Chohan Vs UT of JK and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 277

Abdul Rehman Nath V/s Umar Mohammad Beigh 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 278

Dr. Abid Hussain Vs State (now Union Territory) of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 279

Syed Irfan Abdullah Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 280

Mrs. Syed Asma Balki Vs. Mudasir Shibzada 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 281

ZAHOOR AHMAD DAR Vs JAMEELA BANO & ANOTHER 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 282

A K Engineers and Contractors Pvt Ltd v. Union Territory of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 283

Nadeem Ur Rehman Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 284

Director, Estates Department, Jammu Vs Avtar Krishan 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 285

Kewal Krishan Vs Financial Commissioner ACS Home Department and ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 286

Executive Engineer, Dal Lake Division-I Vs Mousvy Industries Budgam 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 287

DR. INSHA ABID Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 288

Sajad Ahmad Dar v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 289

Madhu Bakshi Vs ACB Kashmir 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 290

Jagar Singh Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 291

Peerzada Shah Fahad Vs UT of J&K & Anr 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 292

Adil Farooq Bhat Vs VC Central University Kashmir 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 293

Sunita Wali Vs UOI and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 294

Jahangeer Ahmad Mugloo Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 295

Davinder Kumar Batra Vs The Authority Under Payment of Wages Act 1936 and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 296

Executive Engineer, Dal Lake Division-I Vs Mousvy Industries Budgam 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 297

M/S FAROOQ AHMAD MIR Vs UT OF J&K AND ORS 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 298

STATE OF J&K Vs FEROZ AHMAD NAJAR & ANR 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 299

Nazir Ahmad Najar Vs UOI 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 300

Hakeem Muzafar Khaliq Vs Inspector General, Crime Branch, Srinagar 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 301

Building Operation Controlling Authority Vs Vikas Gupta 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 302

Members of Saini Community Th. Suksham Singh Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 303

Mehmooda Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 304

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd Vs Safder Ali 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 305

Subash Choudhary Vs J&K Special Tribunal Jammu 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 306

NADEEM UR REHMAN & OTHERS Vs UT OF J&K & OTHERS 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 307

M/s Oikos India Pvt. Ltd Vs M/s K.C. Hotels Pvt. Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 308

Zareefa Banoo Vs Manzoor Ahmad Sheergujri 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 309

Mahroz Akhter Vs Dr Azmat Gouhar 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 310

Director Health Services and Another Vs. Iqbal Ahmad Baqal 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 311

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

OWAIS SYED KHAN Vs UT OF J&K & ORS 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 321

Bashir Ahmad Bhat Vs Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 322

Aabid Rashid Vs Union Territory of Jammu And Kashmir 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 323

Kumar Wanchoo Vs Drug Inspector Manufacturing, Kashmir Division 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 324

Union Territory of J&K V/s Northern Transformers 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 325

UT of J&K Vs X 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 326

Feroz Ahmed Sheikh Vs Union Territory of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 327

Union of India Vs Jagjeet Kour 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 328

University of Kashmir through Registrar V/s Prof. Gh. Nabi Sidiqi and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 329

Ghulam Qadir Bhat and another V/s U.T of J&K and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 330

Judgments/Orders:

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Acquits Man In 22 Years Old Rape Case

Case Title: Raja Sajad Ahmad Wan Vs State of J&K.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 151

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court acquitted a man accused of having committed a rape about 22 years ago. It observed that non-examination of the material Prosecution witnesses i.e. the Doctor and the Investigating Officer, not only causes prejudice to the case of the accused, but also to the case of the Prosecution and creates a reasonable doubt against his involvement in the offence.

GST Budgetary Support Scheme Can't Be Interpreted Liberally: J&K And Ladakh High Court

Case Title: M/s Best Crop Science Industrial Area Versus Union of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 152

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Courts held that the GST Budgetary Support Scheme cannot be interpreted liberally.

The bench of Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul observed that the new scheme provides certain benefits by way of budgetary support to such units that were granted excise duty exemption under an earlier tax regime prior to the introduction of the GST regime. However, budgetary support is conditional and not blanket.

No Appeal Or Revision Against Delay Condonation In Filing Application U/S 34 For Setting Aside Arbitral Award: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Mahant Subash Shah Vs Kabir Singh & Anr

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 153

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that no appeal or revision would lie against an order allowing an application for condonation of delay accompanying an application filed under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for setting aside arbitral award.

A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani said the legislature by using expression an appeal shall lie from the orders provided therein "and from no others" in Section 37 (Appealable orders) has taken away the right to appeal against all orders except specified in Section 37 (1) and (2).

Examination-In-Chief Of Witness Can't Fasten Liability Unless Opposite Party Is Afforded Opportunity To Cross Examine: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: State of J&K Vs Davinder Kumar & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 154

Upholding the acquittal of a Police officer in a 20 year old rape case, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court said that examination-in-chief of a witness cannot be taken into consideration to fasten any liability, unless the opposite party is afforded a reasonable opportunity to cross-examine said witness as regards information tendered by him in his examination-in-chief.

"It shall be highly unsafe to consider the chief examination of a witness, who is not subjected to cross examination and court in such circumstances, is left with no option, but to ignore such testimony", a bench of Justice Rajesh Sekhri observed.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Upholds Acquittal Of Alleged Lashkar-E-Taiba Members Due To 'Unreliable' Prosecution Evidence

Case Title: State (now UT) of J&K Vs Bashir Ahmad

Citation: 2023LiveLaw (JKL) 155

Terming the evidence of prosecution as highly unreliable, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the acquittal of alleged active members of Lashkar-e-Taiba, who as per prosecution were hell-bent upon creating unrest in the valley and had been indulging in the acts of sabotage and terrorist activities to dislodge the Governments.

Expressing serious reservations against the evidence that the prosecution had put forth before the trial court a bench of Justice MA Chowdhary observed,

“The story of the prosecution otherwise seems to be unreliable in view of the fact that the seven persons allegedly involved in terrorist activities and as alleged by the police to be members of Laskhar-e-Taiba a dreaded organization were sitting like ducks at a public place in Wildlife Sanctuary at Manda waiting for the police to be arrested without any reaction and despite availability of the weapon/explosives they had not used them to retaliate while being arrested by the police”.

'Prior Jural Relationship' With Cooperative Society Necessary For Invoking Dispute Redressal Mechanism U/S 70: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Shukal Singh Vs v/s G.M., Jammu Co-Operative Wholesale Ltd.& Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 156

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that Section 70 of the J&K Cooperative Societies Registration Act serves as an internal mechanism for resolving disputes among parties who already have a legal relationship with each other before the dispute arises. It cannot be applied to individuals who do not have any 'prior jural relationship' with the individuals involved in the society's affairs, it emphasised.

Dispatch Of Notice By Bank U/S 13(2) SARFAESI Act Is An Official Act, Presumption Under Evidence Act That It Was Performed Regularly: J&K High Court

Case Title: M/S Shaf Sons through Gowhar Ahmad Mir & Another Vs Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 157

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that dispatching of notice by a Bank under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, to the borrower to discharge in full his liabilities, is an official act with a presumption that it was performed regularly.

Section 114(e) of the Evidence Act establishes a presumption that judicial and official acts are performed regularly and in the context of the SARFAESI Act, the dispatching of a notice by a bank to a borrower falls under this category of official acts, a bench comprising Justices Atul Sreedhan and Mohal Lal emphasised.

Govt Duty Bound To Protect Evacuee Property, Cannot Act Arbitrarily As Owner With Rights Of Alienation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Mohammad Sultan Nagoo vs Custodian Evacuee Property and others.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 158

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has emphasised that the government has a responsibility to safeguard, maintain, and effectively utilize evacuee properties. It cannot make arbitrary decisions or treat these properties as if it is the rightful owner with the power to sell them off, it clarified.

State Cannot 'Pick & Choose' In Selection Process, Must Provide Non-Discriminatory Reasons For Appointment: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Ravinder Singh Vs J&K Sports Council.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 159

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that when exceptionally qualified candidates are not offered appointments, the State must provide valid and non-discriminatory reasons for its decision. The State, especially when it functions as an employer, is obligated to adhere to the principles outlined in Article 14 of the Constitution, it emphasised.

Presumption Of Guilt U/S 29 POCSO Act Rebuttable: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Grants Bail To Woman Accused Of Facilitating Her Daughter's Rape

Case Title: Naseema Begum Vs UT of J&K.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 160

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has granted bail to a woman, accused of assisting the primary suspect in a POCSO case filed over alleged rape of her own daughter.

Presumption of guilt under Section 29 is rebuttable and if the accused can demonstrate to the court during the trial that there is material evidence contradicting the presumption of guilt, they may be granted bail, a bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar maintained.

Civil Court Can Seek Police Assistance To Enforce Temporary Injunctions: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Chajju Singh Bharat Bhushan Gupta Vs Subash Aggarwal and others Chajju Singh and ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 161

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court said that while the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) does not explicitly provide for police assistance in enforcing temporary injunctions, Section 151 of the Code allows the Civil Court to exercise inherent powers to ensure justice and prevent abuse of the court's process.

This provision grants the court the authority to direct the police to provide necessary assistance when there is disobedience or breach of its orders issued under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 of the Code and hence enables the court to maintain the integrity of its orders and ensure the effective implementation of temporary injunctions, a bench of Justice Rajesh Sekhri observed.

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Orders State To Pay Rs 5 Lakh Compensation To Family Of Undertrial Killed In Srinagar Central Jail

Case Title: Mst Jana Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 162

Granting a compensation of an amount of Rs. 5 Lakh to the kin of an undertrial who was killed as a result of an attack by a co-prisoner inside Srinagar Central Jail, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that the prison authorities cannot be absolved of their duty to ensure the safety and security of the undertrials.

"Even though the deceased was an undertrial in a murder case, the respondents were not absolved of their liability to ensure his safety and security in the jail. A prisoner cannot be deprived of his constitutional rights except in accordance with law," Justice Sanjay Dhar said.

J&K Land Acquisition Act | Collector Has No Power To Recall Or Review Compensation Award: High Court

Case Title: Mohd Sharief and others Vs State of J&K.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 163

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that once an award has been made under Section 11 of the State Land Acquisition Act, 1990 the same is final and binding on the parties. The Collector has no authority to recall or review an award after it has been passed, it clarified.

[Motor Accident] Claimant Can't Rely On Disability Certificate Without Examining Doctor Who Provided Treatment Or Assessed Disability: J&K High Court

Case Title: National Insurance Co. Ltd. Subash Chander Vs Subash Chander and others. National Insurance Company Ltd

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 164

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court underscored the critical role of accurate medical evidence in assessing disability and income for determining just compensation in motor accident claims.

A bench comprising Justice Sanjay Dhar has observed,

"In order to ascertain the nature of disability of an injured/claimant and its effect upon his earning capacity, the Tribunal has to make every effort to record the evidence of the Doctor who has treated the injured or who has assessed his permanent disability. Mere production of a disability certificate cannot be taken as proof of the extent of disability stated therein".

[S.55 NDPS Act] Prosecution Obliged To Prove 'Safe Custody' Of Contraband Upon Seizure, Non-Compliance Leads To Acquittal: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: State of J&K Vs Sham Lal

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 165

Highlighting the significance of Section 55 of the NDPS Act, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has said that this provision was specifically introduced to deter any attempts to tamper with contraband. It stresses the crucial need for promptly transferring it to the secure storage of police stations and timely forwarding it to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL)

The burden lies on the prosecution to prove these crucial steps were followed and failure to demonstrate proper handling of contraband raises doubts about its authenticity and integrity, it maintained.

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging SCN Regarding Export Of Banned Yarn Shawls

Case Title: M/s Ali Shah through Arif Ahmad Shah Versus Union of India and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 166

The Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice regarding the export of banned yarn shawls.

The bench of Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul has observed that the act of respondents in seizing consignments or goods took place in Delhi, followed by other events including the issuance of show cause notices, etc., so it is the courts or forums in Delhi where the petitioner can lay his claim or raise his grievances.

Genuine Case For Relaxation: J&K High Court Directs Govt To Reconsider Employee's Claim For Reimbursement Of Medical Expenses Incurred Outside State

Case Title: Monica Pathania Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 167

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court ruled in favour of a contractual government employee, stating that medical expenses incurred by her for her husband's treatment outside the erstwhile State should be reimbursed.

The court emphasized that the government's power to relax rules should be used genuinely, not just to decorate the "Rule Book," and should be exercised in cases where strict adherence to the rules would unfairly burden the beneficiary.

Jammu & Kashmir HC Refuses Interest On Delayed Disbursal Under 'Budgetary Support Scheme', Says Its Not A Right But Concession For Industrial Units

Case Title: M/S VJ Jindal Cocoa Pvt. Ltd Vs Union of India and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 168

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the benefit provided under the Budgetary Support Scheme is not a 'right' of industrial units. Instead, it is regarded as a concession or incentive granted by the Government of India to assist these units in overcoming financial challenges resulting from the withdrawal of area-based exemptions under the Central Excise Act, it clarified.

CCS Rules Cannot Be Applied To CRPF Constables Unless CRPF Rules Are Silent On A Specific Matter: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Union Of India Vs Altaf Ahmad Mir.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 169

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court while reiterating that the service conditions of a CRPF Constable (probationer) are governed by the CRPF Rules 1955 has emphasised that the Central Civil Services (CCS) Rules can only be applied if the CRPF Rules do not explicitly address a specific issue.

If a case is already covered by the CRPF Rules, there is no need to refer to the General Rules like the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, it explained.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Upholds Acquittal Of BSF Personnel In Army Patrol Firing Case That Occurred During Kargil War

Case Title: State of J&K Vs Gulji Bhai & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 170

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the acquittal of Border Security Force (BSF) personnel accused in the highly controversial Army patrol firing case that took place on the fateful night of July 16/17, 1999 during the Kargil War.

"Unfortunately, respondents have been roped in, merely on the basis of suspicion, otherwise, there is absolutely no evidence to establish that respondents had deliberately fired upon the Army patrol party", a bench of Justices Sanjay Dhar and Rajesh Sekhri observed.

No Compulsory Retirement Merely On Committee Recommendation, Competent Authority Must Be Satisfied Of 'Bonafide' Public Interest: J&K High Court

Case Title: State of J&K Vs Rajinder Kumar

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 171

Shedding light on the criteria for compulsory retirement of government employees under the J&K Civil Services Regulations, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the decision to retire an employee prematurely cannot be solely based on recommendations from a committee. Instead, the competent authority must independently form a bona fide opinion that the retirement is in the interest of the institution, it ruled.

Employer Making EPF Contribution Under Central Act Can't Be Compelled To Contribute For Same Employee Under State Act: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: M/s Delton Infra Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of J&K and another

Citation:2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 172

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court ruled that employers cannot be forced to contribute to the Employees' Provident Fund (EPF) under both the Central Employees Provident Fund Act and the Jammu and Kashmir EPF Act for the same employee. Making duplicate contributions would amount to doubling the liability on the part of the employer, the court emphasised.

25 Yrs On, Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Departmental Promotion Committee To Consider Promotion Of Cop Posthumously

Case Title: Sh. Krishan Singh Jasrotia (deceased) represented through LRs Bimla Devi and others Vs Union of India and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 173

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ordered the Home Department to constitute a fresh Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) to consider the posthumous promotion of a late police officer to the rank of Assistant Commandant. The court's decision came after a prolonged legal battle spanning 25 years, in which the petitioner had sought rightful promotion and recognition for his service.

Sarcastic Remarks, Mere Harassment By Husband Due To Marital Discord Not 'Abetment Of Suicide': Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: State of J&K Vs Tariq Hussain.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 174

Mere harassment of a wife by her husband or in-laws due to matrimonial discord or sarcastic remarks per se does not attract the offence of abetment of suicide, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held.

While upholding the acquittal of a man from charges under Section 306 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) after his wife set herself ablaze and died, a single bench of Justice Rajesh Sekhri observed,

"There may be various instances of matrimonial discord between husband and wife and at times wife being constantly taunted and subjected to sarcastic remarks in the house of her in-laws may be driven to commit suicide. However, such instances are normal wear and tear of a matrimonial life. In my opinion mere harassment of a wife by her husband or in-laws due to matrimonial discord or sarcastic remarks perse does not attract Section 306 of RPC (abetment of suicide)."

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Sets Aside Rape Conviction After 17 Yrs, Says Non-Compliance With Section 313 CrPC Prejudiced Accused

Case Title: Raman Masih Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 175

While setting aside a rape conviction handed down 17 years ago, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court highlighted a crucial failure on the part of the Trial Court to adhere to the mandatory procedure outlined in Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

It emphasized that convicting the appellant-accused solely based on incriminating evidence, without providing an opportunity to the appellant to address and explain that evidence, was an invalid approach taken by the trial court.

PSA | Jammu & Kashmir High Court Pulls Up District Magistrate For Wrongly Mentioning Detenu's Name, Issuing Corrigendum As "Cover Up"

Case Title: Ashfaq Ahmed Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 176

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court slammed a District Magistrate for wrongly mentioning the name of detenu in the operative part of the preventive detention order issued under the J&K Public Safety Act and issuing a "so-called" corrigendum after detention

J&K Hindu Succession Act | Will Can Be Executed In Favour Of Unrelated Person: High Court

Case Title: Chand Devi Vs Sonam Choudhary

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 177

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court made it clear that a Will under Section 27 of the Jammu and Kashmir Hindu Succession Act can be executed in favour of a person who is not even related to the executant.

A single bench of Justice Vinod Chaterjee Koul said Will is statutorily recognized mode of "alteration of natural line of succession" delineated by Hindu Succession Act without any prohibition, curbs, rider etc.

Insurer Bound By Contract Entered Into By Authorized Agent On Its Behalf, Premium Paid By Insured To Agent Binds Company: J&K High Court

Case Title: United India Insurance Vs Sajjad Hussain

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 178

Upholding the liability of an insurance company for compensation despite a dishonoured premium cheque, the Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh High Court has recently ruled that that the insurance company cannot evade its responsibility if an authorized agent collects the premium in cash but issues a personal cheque that later bounces.

“It would be deemed as if the amount of the premium had been collected by the insurance company, even though the agent may have instead of depositing the premium with the company, issued a cheque from his own account which ultimately got dishonored”, Justice Sanjay Dhar observed.

Fitness Certificate Implicit In Temporary Registration Certificate For New Vehicles: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: National Insurance Company Ltd. thr. Its Divisional Manager and Anr Vs M/S Rash Builders Civil Contractors and Suppliers thr. its Manager

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 179

The Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh High Court has held that a fitness certificate is implicitly included in the temporary registration certificate issued to a brand-new vehicle and hence repudiating an insurance claim solely based on the absence of a fitness certificate is not sustainable in law.

“…The object behind the requirement of a fitness certificate under Section 56 of the Act and sheer common sense, we cannot contemplate the sale of any brand-new vehicle, which is not otherwise fit. The sale of a brand-new vehicle itself implies that it is fit. It is only after the due course of time, and use of the vehicle, the requirement of fitness becomes relevant. Therefore, the issuance of temporary registration for a brand-new vehicle implies that for the said period of registration, the vehicle is fit”, Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh & Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi observed.

S.397(3) CrPC | Filing Revision Petition Before Sessions Court Doesn't Bar High Court's Inherent Jurisdiction: Jammu & Kashmir HC

Case Title: Bilal Ahmad Ganaie Vs Sweety Rashid & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 180

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court while emphasising the wide amplitude of the High Court's inherent powers clarified that filing a revision petition before a Sessions Court does not preclude the petitioner from invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C).

No FIR Against Detenu, Record Appears To Be Manipulated: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order

Case Title: Abid Hussain Ganie Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 181

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a preventive detention order passed against a person in absence of any FIR against him. A single bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar remarked,

"Surprisingly, when no FIR is shown to have been registered against the petitioner, then how come 27 leaves of FIR etc. have been provided to him. This exhibits total non-application of mind and overzealousness on the part of the detaining authority, which casts serious doubt about the authenticity of the receipt."

[J&K Civil Service Rules] Contractual Employee Not Entitled To Full-Fledged Regular Enquiry Before Termination: High Court

Case Title: Abid Ahmad Ganai Vs UT of J&k & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 182

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court on ruled that a contractual employee is not entitled to a full-fledged regular enquiry before termination, even if the termination is stigmatic in nature.

[PSI Recruitment Scam] Completion Of Investigation Qua Accused, Not Investigation Of Entire Case Material To Determine Default Bail: J&K High Court

Case Title: Yati Yadav Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 183

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court rejected the applications for default bail moved by several accused in the J&K Police Sub-inspector Recruitment Scam, including alleged mastermind Yatin Yadav.

It observed,

"Charge sheet can be said to be complete when it enables the court whether to take or not take cognizance of the offences and if certain facets call for further investigation, it would not render such report other than a final report...completion of investigation relating to offence against the accused and not investigation of case or filing of charge sheet under section 173 Cr.P.C. which would be material for the purpose of determining whether accused is entitled to the grant of statutory bail or not."

Employees' Compensation Act | Insurer Not Automatically Liable To Indemnify Employer For Interest On Delayed Payment Of Compensation: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohd. Abdullah Vs Manager, Trumboo Cement Industry Limited and Another

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 184

The Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh High Court ruled that an insurance company cannot be, as a matter of rule, asked to indemnify an employer for the interest and penalty payable for delayed payment of compensation under the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923.

A single bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar held,

"It is true that under the policy of insurance covering the injuries and death of the workmen working under the employer, the insurer undertakes to indemnify the employer in respect of any compensation payable to such injured/deceased workmen during the course of his employment, but such contract to indemnify the employer in respect of payment of compensation cannot ipso facto extend to the payment of interest and penalty that becomes due from the employer only in case he commits default in payment of compensation due within a period of one month."

[Motor Accident Death] No Interest Can Be Awarded On Compensation For 'Future Prospects': Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: National Insurance Company Limited Vs Mst. Aisha Bano & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 185

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court ruled that there is no need to award interest on compensation ordered under the head of 'future prospects' in a motor accident death case.

Justice M.A Chowdhary explained that 'future prospects' are linked to potential income to be received in the future and thus interest cannot be granted on a future income.

“The reason for awarding interest on the compensation amount, minus the future prospects, is due to the fact that, though the loss of dependency starts from the date of the accident, the compensation amount is computed on the date of the award of the Tribunal, interest is awarded to compensate the loss of money value on account of lapse of time, such as the time taken for the legal proceedings and for the denial of right to utilize the money when due', the bench observed.

No Recovery Proceedings U/S 11A Central Excise Act Unless Sanctioned Refunds Reversed In Appeal: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise Vs Krishi Rasayan Exports Pvt. Ltd

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 186

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that Section 11A of the Central Excise Act 1944 which deals with recovery proceedings is not applicable when the excise duty refund has been sanctioned by the competent authority through proper assessment and after following due process.

“Unless the orders of sanctioning refund passed by the Adjudicating Authority are reversed in appeal or revision under the Act, Section 11 cannot be invoked by terming such sanctioned refund of excise duty as 'erroneous refund' by holding collateral proceedings under section 11A of the Act”, Justice Sanjeev Kumar & Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Upholds Termination Of Judicial Officer, Says Fraudulent Appointments Not Entitled To Safeguards Under Article 311

Case Title: Mohammad Yousuf Allie Vs High Court of JK Th. its Registrar General & Anr.

Citation : 2023 LiveLaw(JKL) 187

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court upheld the termination of a judicial officer on the ground that he fraudulently obtained the benefit of “Resident of Backward Area” certificate during the selection process.

“…The entry into service of the petitioner itself was by fraudulent means and, therefore, depriving him of an opportunity of departmental enquiry is not in violation of Article 311”, Justice Atul Sreedharan & Justice Mohan Lal observed.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Declines Contempt Action Against SSB Chairman Citing UT Admin's Decision Withdrawing Posts After Reorganisation

Case Title: Ishfaq Tantray Vs Khalid Jahangir, Chairman Service Selection Board.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 188

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court refused to initiate contempt action against the Chairman of J&K Service Selection Board for non-compliance of its 2013 direction for undertaking fresh selection process to the posts of Assistant Information Officer Grade-II for which the advertisement was issued in 2006.

A bench of Chief Justice N Kotiswar Singh & Justice Javed Iqbal Wani noted that the direction could not be complied with in view of UT Administration's policy decision to withdraw all posts referred to the JKPSC/JKSSB prior to October 31, 2019 for which the selections were not finalized or posts in which there were pending litigations. Thus it observed that the SSB was not in a position to make any appointments pursuant to the selection process.

Juvenile Justice Board Is 'Criminal Court' Justifying Withholding Of Passport U/S 6(2)(f): Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Hazik Wangnoo Vs Ut of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 189

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court clarified that a Juvenile Justice Board possesses all the trappings of a Criminal Court, justifying the non-issuance of passport or travel documents under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act to a person facing proceedings before the JJB.

Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

"Juvenile Justice Board has all the trappings of a Criminal Court, the proceedings against the petitioner which are pending before the said Board in respect of offences under Sections 447, 354, 323, 382, 201 of IPC would certainly attract the provisions under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act."

J&K Roads Development Agency Is Exempted From TDS Deduction On TD Account Interest: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: The Commissioner of Income Tax v/s The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 190

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that the J&K State Rural Roads Development Agency (JKSRRDA) is exempt from TDS deduction on interest income accrued on Term Deposit Accounts.

The bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Puneet Gupta has observed that JKSRRDA is a society registered under the J&K Societies Registration Act, 1998, and is a body wholly financed by the Central Government for implementation of PMGSY and, therefore, exempt from TDS in terms of Notification No. 3489 dated October 22, 1970, issued by the Central Government under Section 194A(3)(iii)(f) of the Income Tax Act.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Sets Aside "Unceremonious Disengagement" Of Special Police Officer For Non-Compliance Of Natural Justice Principles

Case Title: Sanjay Sharma Vs UT ofJ&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 191

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashed the dismissal of a Special Police Officer (SPO) and reinstated him to his position, reiterating that adherence to the principles of natural justice is nothing but common sense justice.

“…You cannot condemn a person to suffer an adverse consequence in the context of his public position/employment without affording him/her an opportunity of knowing the basis upon which a purported adverse action is aimed to be taken against him/her thereby serve him/her with an opportunity to explain his/her position vis-à-vis the adverse civil consequence conceived to emerge”, Justice Rahul Bharti observed.

Traditional Families Hesitant To Report Crimes Involving Dignity Of Young Woman: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Subash Chander Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 192

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court highlighted the hesitancy of traditional families to report cases concerning the dignity of young women to the police, fearing it might jeopardize their own honour. The court emphasised that a slight delay in lodging an FIR in such cases should not be deemed fatal for the prosecution case.

“…Wherein dignity of a woman that too of a younger age is involved, the traditional families are hesitant to report such matters to the police putting their honour and dignity also at stake, therefore the delay of a single day in lodging of FIR, in the considered opinion of this court, by no stretch of imagination, can be said to be inordinate delay, so as to be fatal for the prosecution case”, Justice M A Chowdhary observed.

Jammu Development Authority Is Creation Of Statute, Exempt From TDS Deduction On Interest U/S 194A(1) Income Tax Act: High Court

Case Title: Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S The J&K Bank Ltd.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 193

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court ruled that the Jammu Development Authority (JDA) is to be considered a corporation established under the State Act and thus is exempt from the operation of Section 194A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

“...The JDA is not incorporated like the company which is incorporated under the Companies Act or the Cooperative Society which is registered under the Cooperative Societies Act. The JDA is a statutory body….There can hardly be any dispute that JDA is a corporation constituted under the State Act i.e the Development Act 1970. S.O 3489 of 1970 clearly notifies a corporation established by a Central, State or Provincial Act exempt from the operation of sub-section (1) of Section 194A of the Act', Justices Sanjeev Kumar & Javed Iqbal Wani observed.

S.482 CrPC Cannot Be Invoked To Challenge Proceedings Initiated U/S 12 J&K Domestic Violence Act: High Court

Case Title: Khalid Amin Kohli Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 194

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) cannot be used to challenge the proceedings initiated under Section 12 of the Jammu and Kashmir Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2010 or the orders passed thereunder.

S.34 SARFAESI Act Bars Grant Of Injunction By Civil Court For Actions Taken Under The Act: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Raj Kumar Gupta Vs Bank of india & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw(JKL) 195

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled that no injunction shall be granted by any court in respect of any action taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act).

“Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act creates a bar and provides that no injunction shall be granted by any court or other authority in respect of any action taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred by or under this Act or under the recovery of debts due to the bank and Financial Institution Act, 1993”, a bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed.

Order XXII CPC For Bringing On Record Legal Heirs Of Deceased Party Apply To Proceedings For Restoration Of Suit: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohhamd Rafiq Khan Vs PNB &

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 196

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that the applicability of Order XXII of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) which govern the procedure for bringing on record the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiffs/ defendants as also the procedure for setting aside of the abatement, is not limited to suits alone.

Single bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed that the provisions of Order XXII are equally applicable in suits, appeals, and proceedings relating to the restoration of a suit.

Dismissing Plea On Ground Of Laches At Post-Admission Stage Not An Apparent 'Error Of Law' Warranting Review: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

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

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 197

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court asserted that dismissing a plea on the ground of laches at a post-admission stage does not tantamount to an apparent error of law, and hence, the court cannot invoke its power of review.

“The question of delay and laches could not have been entertained and considered by the court after the admission of the writ petition cannot by any stretch of imagination said to be ground available to the petitioner to seek review of the judgment/order under review either on the ground that the judgments supporting the said contention of the petitioner came to be discovered after the passing of the judgment under review or on the ground that entertaining and accepting the ground of delay and laches at post-admission stage is an apparent error of law”, Chief Justice N Kotiswar Singh & Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed.

Admin Order To Take Over Madrasas Run By A Particular Trust Cannot Be Universally Applied To Other Madarsas Being Run Legitimately: J&K High Court

Case Title: Raj Ali and Others Vs Union Of India & Ors

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 198

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashed the controversial administrative order issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kishtwar, whereby it had directed the takeover of Madrasas run by several petitioners.

A bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed,

“…The order passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Jammu dated 14.06.2023 is very specific and pertains only to the Madarsas being run by Maulana Ali Miyan Educational Trust, Bathindi. The Divisional Commissioner, Jammu has not passed any order in respect of other Madarsas which are being run by other Educational Charitable Trusts established for the purpose. The Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kishtwar was, thus, not correct to apply the order of the Divisional Commissioner to close down or take over the Madarsas run by the petitioners' Trusts, unless he had in possession a substantial proof that the Madarsas of the petitioners are connected or related to the Maulana Ali Miyan Educational Trust, Bathindi”.

J&K High Court Refuses To Implement Human Rights Commission's Recommendation To Compensate Father Of Youth Killed By Security Agencies

Case Title: Ghulam Rasool Sofi Vs State Of J&k

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 199

The Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh High Court refused to implement the recommendation made by State Human Rights Commission to compensate the father of a youth killed by Indian Securities Agencies.

Those Responsible For National Security Sole Judges Of What Preventive Actions Are Necessary: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Upholds Detention Order

Case Title: Mohammad Younis Mir Vs Union Territory of J&K & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 200

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court emphasised on its limited scope to look into the manner in which the subjective satisfaction is arrived at by the detaining authority to order preventive detention of a person.

“The courts do not even go into the questions as to whether the facts mentioned in the grounds of detention are correct or false. The reason for the rule is that to decide this, evidence may have to be taken by the courts and that it is not the policy of the law of preventive detention. This matter lies within the competence of the advisory board. Those who are responsible for national security or for maintenance of public order must be the sole judges of what the national security, public order or security of the State requires”, Justice M A Chowdhary observed.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Quashes Order Repatriating Employee To Parent Department After 21 Yrs

Case Title: Ravinder Kumar Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 201

Shedding light on the law related to the timeframe for repatriating an employee to his parent department after his deputation, the Jammu & Kashmir High Court ruled that an employee, who has been permanently absorbed into a borrowing department/organization and whose lien has been terminated in their parent organization cannot be repatriated to their parent organization.

“Once the petitioner who has been sent on deputation is absorbed in the borrowing department/organization and his lien in the parent department stood terminated, his repatriation, subsequently, after 21 years by virtue of order impugned is dehors the service rules and is illegal”, observed Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal.

"Fundamentalist Muslim Cannot Be Equated With An Extremist Or A Separatist": Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Shahbaz Ahmad Palla.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 202

"A fundamentalist Muslim cannot be equated with an extremist or a separatist," the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed recently.

The remarks were made by single bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan while dealing with a petition challenging preventive detention of a 22 years old Muslim man inter alia on the ground that he has become a “hard core fundamentalist” and voluntarily agreed to work as Over Ground Worker of the TRF (The Resistance Front), alleged LeT outfit.

CRPF | Heavy & Onerous Responsibility On Disciplinary Authority To Ensure Punishment Proportionate To Misconduct: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Yoginder Singh Vs Union Of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 203

Emphasising the vital role of the Disciplinary Authority in ensuring that punishments imposed on delinquent officials are proportionate to their misconduct, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed the dismissal order of a paramilitary personnel.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Upholds Preventive Detention Of Man Accused In Srinagar DySP Lynching Case

Case Title: Imran Nabi Wani Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 204

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court on upheld the preventive detention of a man who is also the main accused in the DySP lynching case that occurred in Srinagar's Nowhatta area in 2017.

'In Case Based On Circumstantial Evidence, Motive Assumes Importance': Jammu & Kashmir HC Upholds Acquittal In 15 Yrs Old Murder Case

Case Title: State Of J&K Vs Shailender Singh

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 205

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the acquittal of a murder accused in a 15 years old case that was based on circumstantial evidence, stating the prosecution failed to show an unbroken chain of events to prove the guilt of the accused.

“Where a series of circumstances are dependent on one another, they are to be read as one ingredient as a whole and not separately as it is not possible for a Court to truncate and break the chain of circumstances as the very concept of proof of circumstantial evidence would be defeated, in that event and where the circumstantial evidence consist of chain of continued circumstances linked with one another, the Court has to take cumulative evidence of the prosecution before acquitting or convicting the accused”, a bench of Justices Sanjeev Kumar & Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed.

Non-Disclosure Of Material Information By Probationer Sufficient Ground For Termination Without Formal Enquiry: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Bijay Oraon Vs Union Of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 206

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court has ruled that non-disclosure of material information or submission of false information by a government employee, especially in a belt force like the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), can be sufficient ground for termination without the need for a formal enquiry, if the employee is on probation.

“…Even if the employer comes to know about the adverse antecedents of an employee during probation period, it shall be open to the employer to exercise his powers under sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Rules of 1965 and discharge the probationer without assigning any reason”, Justice Sanjay Dhar emphasised.

UAPA | Jammu & Kashmir High Court Issues Guidelines To Expedite Trials Especially During Stage Of Prosecution Evidence

Case Title: Zahoor Ahmad Wani Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 207

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court issued a set of guidelines to Trial Courts in the State to expedite trials, especially during the stage of prosecution evidence.

Notaries Empowered To Attest Affidavits For Writ Proceedings Before High Court: Jammu & Kashmir HC

Case Title: Abdul Rashid Bhat Vs Finanacial Commissioner

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 208

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court upheld the validity of affidavits attested by Notaries appointed under the Notaries Act 1952 for use in writ proceedings before the High Court.

“Rule 181 of the High Court Rules makes the provisions of Section 139 of the Code of Civil Procedure applicable to affidavits intended to be used in the High Court. Thus, a Notary appointed under the Notaries Act is empowered to attest an affidavit which is intended to be used in the High Court.”, the bench said.

CRPF | Mere Receipt Of Termination Order In Kashmir Doesn't Confer Jurisdiction To Hear Challenge Against Order Passed In Patna: J&K High Court

Case Title: Shahnawaz Ahmad Vs Union Of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 209

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court refused to hear challenge to an order passed by CRPF commandant in Patna terminating the services of a personnel, merely because the latter received such order in Kashmir.

A single bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

"In the instant case, the order whereby the petitioner has been declared as a 'deserter' has been passed by Commandant of 134 Bn. CRPF at Gulzarbagh Patna, Bihar. The impugned order of termination of services of the petitioner has been passed by the Commandant at Ranchi Jharkhand and the enquiry proceedings have also taken place at Ranchi Jharkhand. All these places are beyond the territorial jurisdiction of this Court."

[Section 104 CPC] Jammu & Kashmir High Court Says Power Of Appellate Court Circumscribed In Injunction Matters

Case Title: Mudasir Nazir Vs University Of kashmir

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 210

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that an appellate court should be hesitant to intervene and overturn the lower court's decision in injunction applications, solely on the notion that it might have reached a different conclusion if it had considered the matter initially.

It emphasised that if the trial court exercises its discretion reasonably and judiciously, the appellate court should not interfere with its authority and jurisdiction.

J&K Civil Service Regulations | Competent Authority Must Form Bonafide Opinion Based On Relevant Record For Compulsory Retirement: High Court

Case Title: State Of J&K vs Narayan Dutt

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 211

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that to enforce an order of 'compulsory retirement' upon a government servant, the competent authority must reach a bona fide opinion, based on relevant material, that such order is necessary in public interest.

“Merely because the committee has made recommendations for retirement of writ petitioner, he cannot be compulsorily retired unless the competent authority comes to a conclusion after forming a bona fide opinion of its own that the writ petitioner can be subjected to compulsory retirement in the interest of the institution”, a bench of Justices Tashi Rabstan and Mohan Lal observed.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Upholds Preventive Detention Of Alleged Leader Of Banned Organization Jamat-e-Islami

Case Title: Abdul Hameed Ganie @ Dr.Hameed Fayaz vs. State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 212

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court upheld the preventive detention order issued against Ab. Hameed Ganie, allegedly former "Ameer" (leader) of banned organization Jamat-e-Islami. The detention order was passed by District Magistrate, Shopian on September 16, 2022, under the provisions of J&K Public Safety Act, 1978.

“Having glance of the grounds of detention, it is clear that right from the college life the detenue was involved in anti-national activities. His affiliation with banned organization Jamat-e-Islami and holding the different positions in the said organization with an aim and purpose to liberate the State of J&K from India and annex it with Pakistan. His inclination towards secessionist elements gave him a place in Jamat-e- Islami which is a banned organization, of which he was an active member”, Justice M A Chowdhary observed.

Employee Free To Challenge Conditions Of Appointment Order If They Are Not In Conformity With Law: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Sarwa Begum and Ors. (LRs of Late Shabir Ahmad Dar) Vs State of J&K and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 213

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the right of an employee to challenge the conditions of his/her appointment order in case the same is not in conformity with law.

A single bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed,

"Once, the respondents have admitted their mistake of granting the lower pay scale to the petitioner in spite of the fact that the petitioner was entitled for the higher grade being diploma holder, then it was incumbent on the part of the respondents to have rectified their mistake by granting him the benefit of the said grade retrospectively from the date when the petitioner came to be appointed along with all consequential benefits."

LAHDC Elections: High Court Directs Ladakh Authorities To Allow J&K National Conference Candidates To Contest On Reserved Symbol 'Plough'

Case Title: Jammu and Kashmir National Conference through its General Secretary Ali Mohammad Sagar Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 214

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court directed the Union Territory (UT) of Ladakh to let candidates of the J&K National Conference (JKNC) contest on their reserved election symbol 'Plough' in the upcoming Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council (LAHDC) elections.

Industrial Disputes Act | Employer's Failure To Assign Work To Employee Deemed Retrenchment: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: MANAGING DIRECTOR JK HANDICRAFTS Vs AGA SYED MUSTAFA & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 215

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that even if an employer corporation does not explicitly issue a termination order, its behaviour of not assigning work to an employee while doing so for others can still be considered as retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947.

Justice Sanjay Dhar added that any cessation of a workman's service, apart from voluntary retirement, reaching superannuation, or termination due to ill health, is encompassed within the definition of retrenchment.

'Temporary Residence' Under Domestic Violence Act Includes Victim's Shelter Amidst Matrimonial Home Turmoil: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Aamir Javid Waza and ors. Vs Gousia Jan and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 216

Clarifying the interpretation of the term "temporary residence" under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized that a "temporary residence" encompasses situations where an individual is compelled to find refuge due to domestic violence, or where they have been forced out of their matrimonial home.

Using Higher Denomination Note For Goods Of Lower Value Insufficient To Prove Knowledge For Possessing Counterfeit Currency: J&K High Court

Case Title: MOHAMMAD ASHRAF RESHI Vs STATE OF J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 217

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently observed that tendering a higher denomination currency note for goods of lower value is common practice and does not necessarily indicate knowledge of forged notes.

Justice Sanjay Dhar added that no liability can be imposed under Sections 489B and 489C of the RPC unless it is proven that the person in possession or using forged currency notes had knowledge or reason to believe they were counterfeit.

Counterclaims Have Independent Status, Can Continue Despite Dismissal Of Primary Suit: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Abdul Rashid Dar and others Vs Ghulam Qadir Dar and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 218

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that a counterclaim, once raised by a defendant, possesses an independent status and that even in cases where the primary suit is stayed, discontinued, or dismissed, the counterclaim can continue unabated.

Insurance Agents Liable For Errors In Insurance Applications, Must Provide Diligent Assistance To Customers: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Inder Jeet Singh Vs ICICI Lombard and another

Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 219

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that insurance agents are required to provide careful and diligent assistance to customers while helping them complete insurance applications as intermediaries between clients and insurance companies.

Legality Of Award Passed By Labour Court Can't Be Challenged Under Article 226 Of Constitution: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Vishwakarma Gun Works Vs Industrial Tribunal Court and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 220

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the legality or correctness of an Award passed by the Labour Court cannot be challenged under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The Labour Court assumes the powers of a Civil Court when passing an award under the Industrial Disputes Act. Any orders from a Civil Court can be contested before the High Court only under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, by invoking the supervisory jurisdiction, it held.

Nothing Has Improved Even A Decade After Nirbhaya: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Convicts Grandfather Of Raping Toddler

Case Title: BR (name redacted) Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 221

Upholding the conviction of a man accused of raping his one-year-old granddaughter, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court expressed its concern that despite over a decade since the heinous Nirbhaya case, little progress has been made in addressing the increasing crimes against women and children.

25 Years On, Jammu & Kashmir High Court Orders Compensation To Landowners Affected By Ranjit Sagar Dam Submersion

Case Title: Vinod Kumar and Others v. State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 222

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court directed the Union Territory to pay compensation to the landowners whose properties were submerged due to the construction of the Ranjit Sagar Dam (also known as Thein Dam Project) over 25 years ago.

Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal added that the petitioners should not have to wait for intergovernmental settlements for the disbursement obligated to them.

Simultaneous Prosecution Under PMLA, UAPA Not Double Jeopardy: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: IRSHAD AHMAD QURESHI & ANR Vs. STATE OF J&K & OTHERS

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 223

Emphasizing that the offence under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) is distinct and independent from offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAP Act), the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that simultaneous prosecution under both laws does not amount to double jeopardy.

J&K Land Acquisition Act | Deputy Commissioner Not Authorized To Make Section 6 Declarations On 'Public Purpose': High Court

Case Title: Gul Mohammad and Ors Vs State of J&K and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 224

Shedding light on crucial aspects of the land acquisition process under the J&K Land Acquisition Act, 1990, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a Deputy Commissioner exercising the powers of a particular district has not been delegated with the power to make a declaration under Section 6 of the Act which is conclusive evidence that the land is needed for public purpose.

"Useless Formality Theory": J&K High Court Says Post-Decisional Hearing Can Remove Procedural Deficiency Of Pre-Decisional Hearing

Case Title: Noor Illahi Fakhtoo vs UT of J&K and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 225

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court observed that the "Useless Formality Theory" would be relevant in cases where a party's case lacks substance or chances of success are slim, and applying natural justice principles would not change the outcome.

The Bench comprising Justice Javed Iqbal Wani clarified that even in such cases, taking recourse to a post-decisional hearing can fix procedural flaws and ensure fairness.

Mistake Of Fact Or Law Not Ground To Entertain Article 227 Petition Unless There Is Manifest Miscarriage Of Justice: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Surjeet Singh Vs Sheikh Behzad Khalid & others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 226

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court underscored that a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution cannot be invoked merely on the basis of personal dissatisfaction with court orders.

Justice Puneet Gupta stressed that orders cannot be set aside without substantial grounds, and even errors of fact or law may not warrant interference unless they result in a clear miscarriage of justice.

Appellant Should Also Challenge Decree Not Just Judgment U/S 96 CPC: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Nazir Ahmad Ganie and Another Vs Mohammad Amin Ganie

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 227

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court highlighted that an appeal must challenge the decree passed by the original court, not just the judgment as mandated by Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).

Justice Puneet Gupta emphasised that the responsibility to challenge the decree rested with the appellants and that their failure to do so within the stipulated time period could not be excused.

Engaged In Anti-National Activities Since Tender Age: J&K High Court Upholds Detention Of Alleged Dukhtaran-e-Milat Operative

Case Title: Haseena Akhter Vs. Union Territory of J&K & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 228

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court upheld a preventive detention order issued against Haseena Akhter who is allegedly associated with the banned outfit Dukhtaran-e-Milat.

Justice M.A Chowdhary upheld the detention order upon finding that the detenu was involved in anti-national activities from a young age and her activities posed a potential threat to the security of the State, justifying her detention under the Public Safety Act.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Imposes 1 Lakh Penalty On State For Bypassing Land Acquisition Procedures

Case Title: Mian Khan and Others Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 229

Coming down heavily against the state administration for forcibly acquiring land without due process and compensation, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh on the state for violating the constitutional right to property.

Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal emphasised that property rights are a cornerstone of a democratic society governed by the rule of law and that the state cannot arrogate itself power beyond the boundaries set by the Constitution.

Court Can Review Detention Orders Despite Detaining Authority's Subjective Satisfaction: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Mohammad Amin Wani vs. UT Of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 230

While acknowledging the principle of not ordinarily interfering with the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that this principle does not preclude the court from examining the material that forms the basis of detention.

Justice Puneet Gupta found that while the detention order need not be preceded by a police case, the vague allegations against the petitioner were not supported by sufficient evidence and concluded that the detention order did not meet the requisite legal standards.

J&K Distillery Rules | State Can't Levy Excise Duty On Rectified Spirit Unfit For Human Consumption: High Court

Case Title: Gupta Modern Breweries Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 231

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has ruled that the State does not possess the requisite legislative competence to impose Excise Duty on rectified spirit not suitable for human consumption as per Rules 107 and 108 of the Jammu & Kashmir Distillery Rules.

Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi interpreted the Jammu and Kashmir Excise Act to allow Excise Duty only on spirits that had passed certain production and distillation stages and were fit for human consumption.

Drug Abuse An Epidemic Among Youth: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Calls For Collective Action

Case Title: Tawqeer Bashir Magray Vs. Union Territory of J&K & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 232

Upholding the detention order of a petitioner found engaged in illicit drug trafficking, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court emphasised the need for joint efforts from the concerned agencies and community leaders to combat the growing menace of drug abuse, particularly among the youth.

Justice M A Chowdhary observed,

“The epidemic of drug abuse in younger generation has assumed alarming dimensions in the country. Prevention of drug abuse among adolescents requires awareness about its destructive results. To overcome the menace of drug abuse, concerned agencies hand-in-hand with the community heads are required to come forward and deal with this menace with iron hand to save the society more particularly the young generation and families.”

Termination Order Cannot Be Challenged U/S 33C(2) Of Industrial Disputes Act: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: M/S CADILA HEALTH CARE LTD. Vs PRESIDING OFFICER & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 233

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled that the validity of a dismissal order cannot be addressed within the confines of a proceeding under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act as the issue relating to validity of a dismissal order can by no stretch of imagination be termed as incidental to the proceedings under Section 33C(2) of the Act.

Justice Sanjay Dhar observed

“…Unless there is a reference of a dispute regarding validity of a dismissal order before the Labour Court, it cannot adjudicate upon the said issue in a proceeding under Section 33C(2) of the Act. The issue relating to validity of a dismissal order can by no stretch of imagination be termed as incidental to the proceedings under Section 33C(2) of the Act.”

Dying Declaration | One Line Certificate By Doctor That Patient Is Fit Without Any Observation Not Sufficient: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: SSP Kathua Vs Baghwan Das

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 234

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court has made it clear that mere one-line certification by a doctor stating a patient's fitness, without any other observation, is inadequate in assessing the authenticity of the patient's dying declaration.

A bench of Justices Atul Sreedharan and Mohan Lal emphasised on the need for a thorough evaluation of the mental condition of the declarant to ensure that "embellishment in the form of hallucinated statements on account of an improper frame of mind is discounted".

J&K Control Of Building Operations Act | Unauthorised Constructions Compounded By Municipal Authorities Deemed Authorised: High Court

Case Title: BOCA Jammu Vs Nageen Ara

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 235

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that once an unauthorized construction has been compounded by the municipal authorities, it attains the status of an authorized construction, thereby rendering any subsequent legal proceedings challenging its legitimacy as unsustainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal was hearing a petition filed by the Building Operation Controlling Authority seeking to quash an order passed by the J&K Special Tribunal in November 2017 through which it had compounded an unauthorized construction.

Electrocution | 'Negligence Of Injured/Deceased' No Defence For Enterprises Engaged In Hazardous Activity: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: State of J&K and others Vs Smt. Manjeet Kour and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 236

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that enterprises or departments engaged in hazardous activities cannot claim immunity from granting compensation on the ground that accident occurred due to negligence of the injured or deceased individuals.

The Bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Rahul Bharti observed, “The plea that the accident happened due to the negligence of the injured or deceased, as the case may be, is not available to such enterprise or department engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous activity”.

JKSSB Recruitment: High Court Stays Selection Process Till Govt Takes Decision On Recruiting Agency's Allegedly Unfair Conduct

Case Title: Vinkal Sharma and others V/s UT of J&K and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 237

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court dismissed "mere apprehensions" of unfair conduct of the Jammu and Kashmir Service Board (JKSSB) in recruitment but has halted the selection process, till a final decision is taken by the government on the report/recommendations made by the High-Level Committee which was appointed to review the board's functioning.

The Committee was constituted to examine whether the process of tendering followed by JKSSB, in selecting M/S Aptech Ltd. to conduct the examinations, was consistent with the extant Financial Rules/Acts, and, if all the relevant norms were fully complied with.

'Drug Abuse Taking A Toll On Lives Globally': J&K High Court Upholds Preventive Detention Of Alleged Drug Trafficker

Case Title: Happy Singh vs. Union of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 238

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that the ongoing impact of illicit drug trafficking and drug abuse has taken a substantial toll on countless lives and robbed many individuals of their productive years worldwide.

Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal thus upheld the preventive detention of an alleged drug trafficker hailing from Punjab.

“Drug trafficking along with drug abuse, especially by younger generation has continued its significant toll on valuable human lives and productive years of many persons around the globe. With the growth and development of world economy, drug traffickers are also seamlessly trafficking various type of drugs from one corner to other ensuring availability of contrabands for vulnerable segment of society who fall into trap of drug peddlers and traffickers”.

Courts To Avoid Pedantic Approach In Application For Supplementing Grounds For Delay Condonation, Unless They Determine Parties' Rights: J&K High Court

Case Title: SHAH MASOOD AHMAD AND ANR vs. SHAH SHABIR AHMAD

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 239

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court observed that a pedantic approach should not hinder the incorporation of additional grounds in applications seeking condonation of delay.

Justice Puneet Gupta emphasised that the court should refrain from overly strict or pedantic scrutiny when parties seek to introduce supplementary pleadings in applications that do not ultimately determine the parties' rights in the ongoing suit.

Migrant's Property Cannot Be Alienated Without Revenue Minister's Permission, Not Even By Court Decree: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: BILLO KASANA & OTHERS Vs STATE OF J&K & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 240

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court made it clear that the J&K Migrant Immovable Property 1997 prohibits alienation of immovable property of a migrant not only by act of parties but also by a decree or order of a Court or a revenue officer, without previous permission of Revenue and Relief Minister.

"A perusal of Section 4 of the Act of 1997 would reveal that the District Magistrate becomes custodia legis of any property belonging to a migrant and the same cannot be alienated without the permission of Revenue and Relief Minister and any alienation in violation of the same or without such permission is null and void", Justice Sanjay Dhar observed.

Only National Freedom Fighters Eligible For Benefits Under Swantantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, Not Militancy Fighters: J&K High Court

Case Title: Noor Ahmad Shah vs. Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 241

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that individuals who fought against militancy do not meet the criteria for pension under the Swantantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme.

Justice Sanjay Dhar explained that the said pension scheme is particularly designed to honour those who actively participated in the National Freedom Struggle as prescribed in the SSA Pension 1980.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Quashes Detention Orders Of Prominent Clerics Moulana Abdul Rashid Dawoodi, Mushtaq Veeri

Case Title: MOLVI AB. RASHID SHEIKH Vs U T OF J&K &anr. ..Mushtaq Ahmad Bhat @ Veeri V/s Union Territory of J&K & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 242

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashed the detention orders of two prominent clerics, Moulana Abdul Rashid Dawoodi and Mushtaq Ahmed Veeri, who were detained under the Public Safety Act (PSA) last year.

“Surprisingly, when no FIR is shown to have been registered against the petitioner, then how come 05 leaves of FIR etc. have been provided to him. This exhibits total non-application of mind and overzealousness on the part of the detaining authority, which casts serious doubt about the authenticity of the receipt”, the bench remarked.

Framing Of Charges | High Court Can't Scrutinise Evidence To Differ From Trial Court's Opinion: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Brij Bhushan Sharma vs. State Of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 243

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a High Court's scrutiny of the evidence and material collected by the prosecution in support of the charge, in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 561-A of the J&K Code of Criminal Procedure is not any higher than that of the court that framed the charge.

“Sifting of evidence to come to a conclusion contrary to the one arrived at by the trial Court in framing charge is not permissible”, Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Rajesh Sekhri observed.

CPC Intended To Facilitate Justice & Not Penalise Individuals, Procedural Errors Can't Defeat A Rightful Relief: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Mst. Raja Vs.Mst. Fazi and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 244

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court emphasised that the Code of Civil Procedure is intended to facilitate justice, not to penalize individuals and courts typically do not deny rightful relief due to procedural errors or mistakes, whether they result from negligence, inadvertence, or rule violations.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani thus set aside an order passed by the Court of Special Mobile Magistrate, Anantnag invoking its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution.

Issuance Of Process Must Reflect Application Of Mind, Can't Simply Fill Blank Spaces In Printed Proforma: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Sajad Ahmad Mir V/s Mukhtair ul Qadir

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 245

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court deprecated the practice of issuance of process on printed proforma by filling blank spaces.

Bench of Justice Rajnesh Oswal reasoned that issuance of process is a serious matter and it must reflect the application of mind on the part of the concerned Magistrate though it is not incumbent upon the Magistrate to explicitly state the reasons for issuance of process.

Also Read - J&K Agrarian Reforms Act | Landlord-Tenant Relationship To Be Established Between Parties To Avail Ownership Rights U/S 4, 8 : High Court

CPC | Not Necessary To Assess Legality Of Underlying Circumstances While Allowing Amendment To Plaints: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohammad Rafiq Mir Vs Mohamad Bhat

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 246

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that when permitting amendments of plants under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, courts are not obligated to delve into the legality or illegality of the circumstances that prompted the amendment.

Also Read - Jurisdiction U/Art 226 Not Confined To Administrative, Executive Actions Of State, Also Extends To Promissory Estoppel: J&K High Court

Justice Puneet Gupta added that the order sought to be included in the amended pleadings was a matter for a forum other than the civil court.

Govt Notifications That Create, Extinguish Rights Should Be Published In Govt Gazette Unlike Those Declaring Existing Facts: J&K High Court

Case Title: Intizamiya Committee Dargah and Anr v. Union Territory of J&K and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 247

Also Read - History Sheets Only To Be Opened If Authority Reasonably Convinced Of Habitual Offending: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that while government notifications that create or extinguish rights and liabilities require mandatory publication in the Government Gazette, those that inform the public about existing facts can be deemed as directory in nature.

A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani was hearing a petition challenging the takeover of a religious site Ziyarat Sharief Syed Khazir Sahab by the Jammu and Kashmir Wakaf Board.

No Father Would Falsely Accuse An Innocent Person Of Committing Rape On Mentally Unsound Minor Daughter: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Nikhil Sharma Vs State of J&K and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 248

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld a rape conviction on the testimony of the father of the mentally unsound daughter observing that no father would falsely implicate an innocent person for such an offence.

A bench of Justices Rajnesh Oswal and Moksha Khajuria Kazmi was hearing an appeal against the judgment passed by the Additional Sessions Judge which convicted the appellant for the commission of offences under Sections 363 and 376 RPC.

Court Not Barred From Assessing Detention Orders If Unjust Detention Suspected: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Abdul Rashid Dar vs. UT Of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 249

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a detention order observing that while the Court does not engage in evaluating the detention order as in an appellate process, it does not imply that the Court is entirely precluded from scrutinizing the detention order.

Justice Puneet Gupta added that if it finds that the order is merely a facade designed to unjustly detain an individual, the Court is duty-bound to intervene, as safeguarding the liberty of the detainee is of paramount importance.

J&K Arbitration And Conciliation Act | Filing Application U/S 5 Not Bar To Referral For Arbitration U/S 8(1): High Court

Case Title: Brij Mohan Sawney Vs Sanjeev Kumar Gupta

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 250

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that filing of the application under Section 5 of the Jammu and Kashmir Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1997 cannot be construed as a submission of statement of the substance of the dispute within the meaning of Section 8(1) of the Act to create a legal bar in referring the matter to an arbitrator

FIR Can Be Registered On Complaint Received Via WhatsApp: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Dilshad Sheikh & Ors vs Sabha Sheikh

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 251

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court r held that registration of complaints via WhatsApp, coupled with acknowledgement by relevant authorities, is substantial compliance of Sections 154(1) and 154(3) of CrPC- provisions pertaining to registration of FIRs.

History Sheets Only To Be Opened If Authority Reasonably Convinced Of Habitual Offending: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Bashir-Ud-Din Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 252

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that law enforcement shall strictly adhere to established parameters in Police Rules while opening or retaining history sheets. It added that a history sheet can be opened only on the subjective satisfaction of the authority that the person is a habitual offender.

Justice M A Chowdhary added that authorities must exercise this discretion based on reason and justice, not personal opinion or whims and their actions should adhere to the law and established procedures, avoiding arbitrary, vague, or fanciful decisions.

Jurisdiction U/Art 226 Not Confined To Administrative, Executive Actions Of State, Also Extends To Promissory Estoppel: J&K High Court

Case Title: Hotel Ashai Srinagar & Ors. Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 253

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that the High Court's authority under Article 226 of the Constitution is not confined to scrutinizing the administrative and executive decisions of the government but also applies to the applicability of the doctrine of promissory estoppel.

Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed that jurisdiction under Article 226 can be invoked to ensure that the government abides by its promises.

“The jurisdiction of the High Court while exercising the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not restricted only to the review of the administrative actions and executive decisions of the State but also extends to the applicability of the "doctrine of promissory estoppels" of which the whole object is to see that the Government sticks to its promise and abides by it”.

J&K Agrarian Reforms Act | Landlord-Tenant Relationship To Be Established Between Parties To Avail Ownership Rights U/S 4, 8 : High Court

Case Title: Ama Teli V/s Manzoor Ahmad Bhat and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 254

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that in order to get the benefit of Sections 4 and 8 of the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 it has to be established that there was a relationship of a landlord and tenant between the parties and a tenant who was in possession of the land was paying rent to the landlord.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani emphasized that the Act aimed to extinguish the landlord-tenant relationship and provided a specific process for tenants to benefit from it. This included attestation of mutations under sections 4 and 8, based on the existence of a landlord-tenant relationship.

Offences Under Prevention Of Corruption Act Can Be Invoked Against Persons Discharging Public Duty, Not Only Public Servants: J&K High Court

Case Title: Sheikh Abdul Majeed Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 255

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that a broad interpretation of the term "public servant" under Section 2(c) of the Prevention Of Corruption Act is essential to curb the growing menace of corruption in the society imparting public duty.

Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal also clarified that it would be inappropriate to limit the definition by an interpretation which would be against the spirit of the statute.

“In furtherance of the fight against corruption, a broad interpretation to the provisions of this statute is required to be given and the arms of this Act are required to be extended to the maximum. The offences under the P.C.Act can be invoked not only against a public servant but also against a person, who by virtue of his office has been discharging 'public duty'”.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Dismisses Plea By Civil Judge Aspirants Seeking Relaxation Of Upper Age Limit

Case Title: Mridulla Kirti Vs High Court of J&K

Also Read - Can't Convict Drug Manufacturer Twice For Same Violation Even If Substandard Drug Samples Lifted From Different Places: J&K High Court

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 256

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court dismissed a petition filed by a group of candidates seeking age relaxation for the Kashmir Civil Service (KCS) Judicial Examinations.

The court said that while participating in the recruitment process, a candidate must possess the prescribed eligibility and unless there is any express provision to the contrary, there cannot be any relaxation in the requisite eligibility criteria.

Degrees Issued By Private Universities Not Recognised By UGC Invalid For Govt Jobs: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Reiterates

Case Title: MAQSOOD AHMAD SHOOSHA Vs. STATE OF J&K &OTHERS

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 257

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court reiterated that a degree issued by a private university through a study centre or off-campus centre that lacks prior approval from the UGC is invalid and cannot be utilised to secure employment within the Government sector.

Justice Sanjay Dhar added that when the petitioner himself was not eligible to be selected, he could not challenge the selection of others who appeared to have obtained their diplomas from recognised institutions.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Refuses To Postpone Civil Judge Exam, Says Candidates Expected To Be Prepared

Case Title: Kirti Mridulla Vs J&K High Court

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 258

Dismissing a fresh plea seeking deferment of the Civil Judge Exam for more preparation time to aspirants, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court said that once the candidate is ready to apply for any particular post, he cannot claim a specific period for preparation as he is supposed to be prepared.

“The discretion of the Commission to conduct the examination cannot be normally interfered with by the court unless the Court is of the view that the time period has been scheduled with some malafide purpose or extraneous reasons which of course is conspicuous by absence in the present petition. No such plea is raised”, the court said.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Grants Relief To Islamic Cleric Detained Based On FIR Which Concluded In Acquittal

Case Title: Abdul Majeed Dar alias Madnee Vs UT of Jammu and Kashmir & others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 259

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed the detention order passed against Abdul Majeed Dar, a prominent Islamic cleric popularly known as AL Madnee.

Noting that the detaining authority had failed to express any compelling reason for the detention, the bench observed impugned detention order against the detenu and in fact has failed to express any compelling reason thereof. The impugned order, thus, in law, does not sustain on this count alone.

Challenging Detention Orders, Getting Stay Before Execution May Prevent Proper Examination Of Evidence: J&K High Court

Case Title: Union Territory of J&K Vs Abdul Qayoom Bhat.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 260

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that after challenging a detention order before its execution through legal channels, they cannot argue that the order should be quashed due to a lack of live link between the current situation and the one when the detention order was issued.

A division bench of Chief Justice N Kotiswar Singh and Justice Rajesh Sekhri reasoned that by preemptively challenging the order, they prevented a proper examination of whether there were adequate grounds or evidence for the detention order in the first place.

Smart Satellite Township: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Orders Reassessment Of Land Compensation To Claimants

Case Title: Ab. Hamid Bhat Vs Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 261

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court directed the government to reassess the amount of compensation and improvement charges to be paid to land claimants, emphasizing the need for a fair evaluation of the value of the land involved in the Smart Satellite Township dispute.

Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal dismissed the pleas as barred by res subjudice on the issue of tenancy but directed the reassessment of compensation/improvement charges based on current rules and parameters.

Can't Dismiss Appeals Solely For Late Submission Of Documents, Procedural Errors Can't Nullify One's Right To Appeal: J&K High Court

Case Title: Ghulam Din Bhat and another Vs Mst Jana

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 262

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the dismissal of the appeal by the appellate court solely due to the late submission of the certified copy of the order was not legally sustainable and amounted to a failure of justice.

A bench comprising Justice Javed Iqbal Wani emphasised that a person's right to appeal cannot be nullified simply because they did not strictly follow procedural rules.

Consumer Commission Can Revive Cases Consigned To Records, Does Not Qualify As Review Or Recall: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Tabeen Mineral Water Private Limited Vs National Insurance Company Limited

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 263

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that restoring a case consigned to records without an adverse order or a decision on parties' rights does not qualify as a review and hence such a case could be called back by the Consumer Commissions.

A bench of Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Justice M. A. Chowdhary however acknowledged that the Consumer Commissions, except for the National Commission, do not have the power to review or recall their own orders on merits.

'Satisfied With Measures Taken By Authorities To Preserve Green Spaces, Parks': Jammu & Kashmir High Court Closes PIL

Case Title: Court On Its Own Motion Vs Comm. Secy. Govt. of JK Tourism and Ors

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 264

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court expressed satisfaction with the measures taken by the authorities regarding the maintenance and preservation of green spaces and parks in the region, particularly Srinagar and Jammu.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi after carefully reviewing reports submitted by the concerned authorities, decided to close the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) on the subject.

Order 23 Rule 3(A) - Bar On Filing New Suits Only Applicable To Parties Involved In Compromise Decrees, Not To Strangers: J&K High Court

Case Title: Nikhat Nabi v M/s Fancy Fabrics & Ors (J&K Bank Ltd)

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 265

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that although Order 23, Rule 3-A of the Civil Procedure Code bars new suits from setting aside a decree based on a lawful compromise, the bar only applies to parties involved in the compromise and does not preclude strangers to the suit from filing independent suits to challenge the compromise decree.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani also added that while the law allows strangers to the compromise to file independent suits, the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court was not appropriate for the issues raised in this case.

UAPA | Appellant Authority Cannot Remand Case Back To Designated Authority Beyond Time Limit Prescribed U/S 25: J&K High Court

Case Title: G. M. Bhat v State of JK

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 266

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that once the appellate authority recognises the lack of reasoning in the designated authority's order, it is imperative for the appellate body to either confirm or revoke the order under Section 25(6) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act within the time limit specified therein.

Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal clarified that the appellate authority cannot remand the case potentially extending the statutory time limit beyond the prescribed 60 days for the designated authority to confirm or revoke the order.

Lok Adalat Awards Deemed Decrees, Further Appeals U/S 96 CPC Not Allowed: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Chief Engineer PWD Kashmir Vs Fahmeeda Begum

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 267

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that every award issued by the Lok Adalat is deemed to be a decree of a Civil Court and is final and binding, hence closing the door to further appeals under Section 96 of the CPC.

Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal noted that an award of the Lok Adalat can only be challenged if there is an allegation of fraud or if the agreement forming the basis of the decree is invalid.

Order 2 Rule 2 CPC | No Bar On Subsequent Suit If Cause Of Action In Both Suits Not Same: J&K High Court

Case Title: Shakeel Ahmad Kuchay Vs. Manmohan Lal

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 268

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that a subsequent suit is barred only if the first suit and the second suit are based on the same cause of action under Order 2 Rule 2 of the CPC.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani added that the court should not prematurely dismiss a suit or an application for an interim injunction if there are triable issues and that issues regarding the cause of action should be fully examined during the trial rather than at the threshold of the case.

Director's Resignation Has Immediate Effect Only In Absence Of Explicit Provision In Articles Of Association: J&K High Court

Case Title: Naveen Bhatnagar vs M/s Sudarsham Consolidated Limited

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 269

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that a Director's resignation is deemed to take immediate effect only in cases where the Articles of Association do not specify the resignation's effect.

Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

".. if the Articles of Association of a company make a provision for resignation, the same has to be resorted to in accordance with the provisions contained in the Articles of Association. As to when a resignation is to take effect on acceptance, the same would be governed by the Articles of Association. In the absence of any indication as regards the effect of resignation in the Articles of Association, a resignation would take effect immediately."

English Translated Copy Certified By A Sworn Or Official Translator Is Sufficient Compliance Of Section 47(2) Of The A&C Act: J&K High Court

Case Title: CRP FOOD IMPORT-EXPORT v. KASHMIR KESAR MART,

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 270

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that filing of an English translated copy certified by an official or sworn translator satisfies the requirement of Section 47(2) of the A&C Act which provides that if an award is in a foreign language, a translated copy of the award is to be filed for the purpose of the enforcement of the foreign award and the same has to be certified by the Consular or Diplomatic agent of the award holder's country.

CPC | Relevance Of Documents Primary Consideration Before Allowing Order XI Rule 12 Application: J&K High Court

Case Title: Rajan Gupta V/s Manoj Gupta

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 271

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the primary consideration for the court before allowing an application under Order-XI Rule-12 CPC lies in determining the relevance of the documents, especially when a party seeks a specific document.

Justice Sindhu Sharma clarified that any document shedding light on the proceedings becomes pertinent, contributing to the understanding of the matter in dispute.

Detention Orders With Irrelevant Grounds Violate Constitutional Rights, Grants Detenu Right To Seek Relief From Court: J&K High Court

Case Title: Fayaz Ahmad Wani Vs Union Territory of J&K and ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 272

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that including irrelevant or non-existent grounds in a detention order violates the constitutional rights of the detenu, allowing them to seek court relief.

Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul explained that such inclusions infringe upon two crucial rights: firstly, the inclusion of irrelevant or non-existent grounds infringes upon the primary right, and secondly, incorporating obscure or vague grounds among clear ones infringes upon the secondary right.

If Only One Conclusion Possible From Undisputed Facts, Possible Breach Of Natural Justice Does Not Automatically Imply Prejudice: J&K High Court

Case Title: Shamsher Singh Manhas V/s State of J&K and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 273

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that in situations where only one conclusion was possible upon admitted or undisputed facts, a breach of natural justice does not automatically imply prejudice.

Justice Sindhu Sharma thus upheld the cancellation of the allotment of a shop in Jammu to the allotee petitioner.

“Even otherwise, if on undisputed and admitted fact, if only one view is possible, then even if no opportunity of hearing is provided, the impugned notice can[not] be quashed”.

CRPF Act | Commandant Authorised To Dismiss Personnel For Misconduct, Dismissal & Removal Are Minor Penalties: J&K High Court

Case Title: Jagdish Chander Vs Union Of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 274

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that Section 11(1) of the CRPF Act allows the Commandant the discretion to dismiss or remove a member of the force found guilty of misconduct as a penalty.

Justice Sanjay Dhar also clarified that under Section 11, dismissal and removal from service are classified as minor punishments.

"..it is clear that the Commandant is well within his powers to pass an order of dismissal of service of a delinquent CRPF Personnel if he feels that the misconduct is of such a nature as would warrant aforesaid punishment. This can be done by him in exercise of his powers under Section 11(1) of the CRPF Act. Dismissal and removal from service are being considered to be minor punishments as per Section 11 of the CRPF Act. These punishments can be inflicted in addition to or in lieu of punishments provided under Clauses (a) to (e) of subsection (1) of Section 11 of the Act."

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging SCN Regarding Export Of Banned Yarn Shawls

Case Title: M/S Ali Shah Versus Union of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 275

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Courts held that jurisdiction in the case of shawls containing prohibited material lies in Delhi, not Jammu & Kashmir, as the seizure took place in Delhi.

The bench of Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Justice M.A. Chowdhary observed that in the absence of any specific pleadings in the writ petitions as well as memoranda of appeals, it cannot be said that any part of the cause of action had accrued to the appellant-petitioner at Srinagar.

Prevention of Corruption Act | Sanctioning Authority's Competence, Application Of Mind Can Be Examined Only During Trial: J&K High Court

Case Title: FAROOQ AHMAD LONE Vs STATE OF J&K & OTHERS

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 276

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that the absence of sanction to prosecute a public officer can be challenged at the beginning of a case, but challenges related to the competence of the sanctioning authority and the application of mind can only be raised during the trial.

J&K High Court Orders Thorough Probe Into Alleged Custodial Torture, Mutilation Of Police Constable

Case Title: Khursheed Ahmad Chohan Vs UT of JK and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 277

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court highlighted that the police authorities and the court should carefully exercise discretion to determine if a second FIR is warranted based on case-specific considerations.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani thus ordered a thorough investigation into the alleged severe custodial torture and mutilation of a police constable while in the custody of the Joint Interrogation Centre (JIC) Kupwara.

Court's Discretion To Extend Time To File Written Statement Beyond 120 Days Revoked By Amendments To J&K CPC: High Court

Also Read - Can't Convict Drug Manufacturer Twice For Same Violation Even If Substandard Drug Samples Lifted From Different Places: J&K High Court

Case Title: Abdul Rehman Nath V/s Umar Mohammad Beigh

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 278

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that in view of the substitution and addition of the proviso to Order VIII CPC, the legislature has taken away the discretion which was earlier vested with the court to extend the time to file the written statement beyond the 120 day period.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani highlighted the implication of the amendment.

“The only inescapable conclusion emerges from above is that if a defendant fails to file his written statement within the prescribed time provided under Order VIII Rule (1), the right to file same shall stand forfeited and the Court can in no situation allow the same to be taken on record.

Objections U/S 47 CPC Must Be Raised At Initial Stages, Cannot Be Entertained Once Court Has Issued Order For Effective Execution: J&K High Court

Case Title: Dr. Abid Hussain Vs State (now Union Territory) of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 279

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that objections under Section 47 CPC must be raised at the initial stages of the execution application and these objections cannot be raised once the court has already exercised its jurisdiction, issued an order for effective execution, and called for a compliance report.

Furthermore, Justice Javed Iqbal Wani stressed that objections cannot be raised once the respondents have committed to implementing the judgment and decree.

UAPA | Plea For Default Bail Filed A Day Before Expiry Of Authorized Custody Period Not Maintainable: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Syed Irfan Abdullah Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 280

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has made it clear that a plea for default bail filed a day before the expiry of authorized custody period under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) is not maintainable.

Finding that the appellant in this case had moved an application for default bail on the 90th day of the 90-days authorized custody period, a bench of Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Rajesh Sekhri observed,

"In the instant case we find that the appellant had moved an application for default bail on 11-04-2023 which was the 90th day of the authorized custody of the appellant. That being so, the application moved by the appellant for default bail was stillborn and not maintainable in law, We cannot lose sight of the fact that the prosecution has now presented the challan after completing the investigation within the period authorized by the NIA Court”.

Orders Passed U/S 12 Domestic Violence Act Can't Be Assailed Directly U/S 482 CrPC Unless Remedy Of Appeal Is Availed: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mrs. Syed Asma Balki Vs. Mudasir Shibzada

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 281

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that orders passed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) cannot be directly challenged under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) unless the remedy of statutory appeal is availed.

Dismissing a petition under Section 482 assailing the orders passed by the Judicial Magistrate under Sec 12 of the DV Act, Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

“Without going into the question, whether or not the proceedings under the D.V.Act are of civil in nature, one thing is clear that the remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner against the impugned order. Without availing the said remedy the petitioner could not have rushed to this Court to file proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C or by invoking revisional powers of this Court”.

Muslim Wife Can't Be Denied Maintenance When Factum Of Divorce Not Properly Established: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: ZAHOOR AHMAD DAR Vs JAMEELA BANO & ANOTHER

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 282

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court ordered a Muslim man to maintain his wife till the factum of divorce, as had been claimed by him, is established.

The bench reasoned that denying maintenance would defeat the purpose of Section 488 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Pari Materia with sec 125 CrPC), which aims to provide temporary financial support to women during marital disputes.

Arbitration Clause In The Original Contract Would Also Apply To Inseparable Additional Work Carried Out Without Execution Of A Formal Agreement: J&K&L High Court

Case Title: A K Engineers and Contractors Pvt Ltd v. Union Territory of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 283

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the arbitration clause contained in the original contract would also govern any dispute arising out of an additional work carried out without execution of a formal agreement.

The bench of Chief Justice N. Kotiswas Singh held that when a contractor, initially tasked with constructing a single-lane bridge, is subsequently directed by the employer to expand the scope to build a two-lane bridge without formalizing a new agreement or amending the original contract, the terms of the initial contract, including the arbitration clause, extend to cover the additional work.

NEET PG 2023 | Meritorious Reserved Category Candidates Entitled To Reserved Disciplines If Preferred Choice Unavailable In Open Merit: J&K High Court

Case Title: Nadeem Ur Rehman Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 284

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a Meritorious Reserved Category Candidate (MRC) who secured admission in NEET-PG from the open merit category should be granted allocation to a discipline from the reserved category if their preferred choice is unavailable in the open merit category.

Highlighting the mandate of Rule 17 of the J&K Reservation Rules Justice Sanjay Dhar further clarified that the leftover discipline/stream/college in the open merit category shall thereafter be allocated to the reserved category candidate who would get selected consequent upon the reserved category candidate having been selected in open merit category.

J&K Public Premises Act | Employee's Right To Retain Govt Accommodation Limited To One Month Post-Retirement: High Court Upholds Demand Of Rent

Case Title: Director, Estates Department, Jammu Vs Avtar Krishan

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 285

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court made it clear that in terms of J&K Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act 1988, a Govt. employee on his retirement can retain govt. accommodation for a period of one month and thereafter, he has no right whatsoever to retain the same.

Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed,

“From a bare perusal of the regulations framed by the Government and also the provisions of Civil Services Regulation, it is manifestly clear that a Govt. employee on his retirement can retain govt. accommodation for a period of one month and thereafter, he has no right whatsoever to retain the same”.

Daily Diary Reports Must Contain Details Of 'Specific Activities' That Necessitated Preventive Detention: J&K High Court

Case Title: Kewal Krishan Vs Financial Commissioner ACS Home Department and ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 286

Quashing a detention order against an individual under Section 3 of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised the indispensability of detailed and substantial grounds, especially in the context of Daily Diary Reports (DDRs),

Allowing a habeas corpus plea of the detenue, Justice Rajnesh Oswal said that the absence of essential details within such documents renders them insufficient to uphold the legitimacy of a preventive detention order.

Order 20 Rule 16 CPC | Not Mandatory To Pass Preliminary Decree In Every Suit For Accounts: J&K High Court

Case Title: Executive Engineer, Dal Lake Division-I Vs Mousvy Industries Budgam

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 287

Elucidating the application of Order 20 Rule 16 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the Court is not mandated to pass a preliminary decree before a final decree in every suit for accounts. Instead, the decision depends on the unique facts and circumstances of each case, it clarified.

NEET PG - Candidates Taking Seat In 3rd Round AIQ Counselling Can't Withdraw Or Participate In Further Rounds : J&K&L High Court

Case Title: DR. INSHA ABID Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 288

Affirming the irrevocable nature of the third round of counselling under the All India Quota for NEET-PG admissions, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that candidates who secure a seat in the third round of counselling under the All India Quota are prohibited from withdrawing or participating in any subsequent counselling rounds.

Spotlighting Clause 1.5 of Chapter 1 of the Information Bulletin & Counselling Scheme for NEE-PG (MD/MS/DNB/MDS) Counselling, Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

“From a perusal of the aforesaid Clause, it is clear that once a candidate joins in 3rd round of counselling in All India Quota, he/she cannot be allowed to resign from the 3rd round and he/she cannot be allowed to participate in further rounds of counselling after joining in 3rd round of counselling of All India Quota”.

'Tendency To Detain Critics Of Govt Abuse Of Preventive Detention Law' : High Court Quashes Detention Of Kashmir Journalist

Case : Sajad Ahmad Dar v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir,

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 289

While quashing the detention of Kashmir-based journalist Sajad Ahmad Dar, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh criticised the tendency of authorities to detain persons for simply being the critics of the government, terming it as an abuse of the preventive detention law.

"Such a tendency on the part of the detaining authority to detain the critics of the policies or commissions/ omissions of the Government machinery, as in the case of the present detenu- a professional media person, in our considered opinion, is an abuse of the preventive law," the Court observed in the judgment.

Investigating Agencies May Seize Passport But Not Impound It: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Madhu Bakshi Vs ACB Kashmir

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 290

Distinguishing between the powers of the police and the Passport Authority with regard to the seizing and impounding of passports, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that while the police may seize a passport under Section 102 of the CrPC, the impounding can only be done by the Passport Authority under Section 10(3) of the Passports Act.

Police Must Limit Surveillance Register Entries To Respect Citizen's Privacy, Fundamental Rights: J&K High Court

Case Title: Jagar Singh Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 291

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court urged the Police officers to strictly interpret and limit Surveillance Register entries to respect citizen's fundamental freedoms, ensuring unobtrusive and lawful surveillance.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani added that surveillance must not intrude to compromise individual dignity and the rules governing Surveillance Register entries and surveillance methods should acknowledge the caution and care required by police officers in these procedures.

Lowering India's Reputation Not 'Terrorist Act'; Holding So Would Mean Any Criticism Of Centre Will Be UAPA Offence : J&K&L High Court

Case Title: Peerzada Shah Fahad v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 292

While granting bail to Kashmir-based news journalist Peerzada Shah Fahad, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh rejected an argument raised by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) that any act affecting India's dignity and lowering the country's global image will be a 'terrorist act' as defined under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act.

If this argument is accepted, it would mean that any criticism of the Central Government will be a 'terrorist act' the division bench comprising Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Mohan Lal observed.

Fundamental Right To Education Doesn't Extend To Candidates Ineligible To Appear In Examinations: J&K High Court

Case Title: Adil Farooq Bhat Vs VC Central University Kashmir.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 293

Drawing a line between upholding a fundamental right and ensuring that academic prerequisites remain an indispensable criterion for students seeking to sit for examinations, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that while the right to education is a fundamental right, its essence does not stretch to endorsing the participation of ineligible candidates in examinations.

Private Dispute Between Employer-Employee Not Amenable To Writ Jurisdiction Unless Statutory Violations Demonstrated: J&K High Court

Case Title: Sunita Wali Vs UOI and others

Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 294

Highlighting the boundaries of writ jurisdiction in employment-related disputes, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that not all disputes between employers and employees are amenable to the writ jurisdiction.

A bench of Justice Rajnesh Oswal clarified that a private dispute between the employer and the employee qua the contract of service without demonstrating any statutory violation by the employer does not warrant indulgence by the Court.

Preventive Detention | J&K High Court Orders Compassionate Release Of Detenu To Mourn Brother's Demise

Case Title: Jahangeer Ahmad Mugloo Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 295

While granting temporary release to a person under preventive detention, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that the stringent provisions outlined in Section 13 of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (PIT-NDPS Act) do not serve as a hindrance for a constitutional court exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to order release of a detainee.

S.25FFF ID Act | Enterprise Shutting Due To Financial Difficulties Not 'Unavoidable Circumstance' To Deny Retrenchment Compensation: J&K High Court

Case Title: Davinder Kumar Batra Vs The Authority Under Payment of Wages Act 1936 and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 296

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the closure of an enterprise due to financial difficulties cannot be deemed an "unavoidable circumstance" under Section 25-FFF of the Industrial Disputes Act, thereby reinforcing the entitlement of employees to retrenchment compensation.

Citing the explanation to Section 25-FFF of the Industrial Disputes Act, Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed,

“..where an undertaking is closed down due to financial difficulties which is the case in the present petition, shall not be deemed to be closed down on account of unavoidable circumstances beyond control of the employer”.

CPC | Proprietary Concerns Can File Suits Provided Complete Details Of Owner Are Disclosed In Plaint: J&K High Court

Case Title: Executive Engineer, Dal Lake Division-I Vs Mousvy Industries Budgam

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 297

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a suit by a proprietary concern of a sole proprietor or under an assumed business name is maintainable, provided complete details of the owner are disclosed in the plaint.

Clarifying the law on the subject of suits filed by proprietary concerns, Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed,

“..A suit by a proprietary concern of a sole proprietor or by the assumed business name or style of a person seems to be maintainable; only legal requirement being that when such a suit is filed, complete details of the owner of the proprietary concern or assumed business name should be disclosed in the plaint as required under Order 7 Rule 1 of the Code to establish the identity of the owner of the proprietary concern or the assumed business name".

Non-Adherence Of Codal Formalities No Ground To Deny Contractor's Dues After Work Completion: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: M/S FAROOQ AHMAD MIR Vs UT OF J&K AND ORS

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 298

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court said that the Government cannot deprive a contractor of his dues after work completion, by raising a plea that codal formalities at the time of allocation of the work had not been not adhered to.

Justice Sanjay Dhar said that the adherence to codal formalities is an internal mechanism of the Department and once they had allotted a contract for which work had been executed, they were bound to release the dues in favour of the contractor for the work done.

Contradiction On Case's Crucial Aspects Totally Discredits Witness Statement, Makes It Unreliable: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: STATE OF J&K Vs FEROZ AHMAD NAJAR & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 299

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that the successful contradiction of a witness's statement on crucial aspects of a case would totally discredit their account and render it unreliable and untrustworthy.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed:

“It is true that even if defence is successful in contradicting a witness, it would not always mean that the contradiction in her two statements would result in totally discrediting this witness but when the contradiction relates to vital aspects of the case and the version of occurrence given in previous statement by a witness is entirely different from the version of occurrence given by such witness during the trial of the case, it does definitely make the statement of such witness unreliable and untrustworthy”.

'Seema Suraksha Bal' A Central Force With Pan India Presence, Its Orders Subject To Challenge Across All High Courts: J&K High Court

Case Title: Nazir Ahmad Najar Vs UOI

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 300

The Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh High Court upon quashing the removal order of a Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) Constable observed that the Seema Suraksha Bal (SSB), is a force of the Union of India with a pan-India presence, making orders passed by it appealable before any of the High Courts in the country.

J&K Reservation Act 2004 | Social Caste Certificate Can Only Be Cancelled By Deputy Or Divisional Commissioner: High Court

Case Title: Hakeem Muzafar Khaliq Vs Inspector General, Crime Branch, Srinagar

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 301

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed an order cancelling the Other Social Caste (OSC) Certificate of the petitioner while observing that the Additional Deputy Commissioner lacked the authority to cancel such certificates.

A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal has clarified that if any person is aggrieved by the issuance of an OSC certificate by the competent authority under section 16 of the Reservation Act, only the Deputy Commissioner or Divisional Commissioner can entertain an appeal and cancel the same if issued in violation of rules.

BOCA Act | S.15 Confers Finality To Tribunal Orders, Invoking Extraordinary Jurisdiction Directly Conflicts With The Same: J&K High Court

Case Title: Building Operation Controlling Authority Vs Vikas Gupta

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 302

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a writ petition invoking extraordinary jurisdiction, emphasizing that the finality of orders under Section 15 of the Building Operations Controlling Authority (BOCA) Act, 1988, would conflict with the imposition of extraordinary jurisdiction by the Court.

A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed that since finality had been attached to an order made by an Authority or an appellate officer appointed by the Government for hearing appeal(s) under section 13 of the Act of 1988, filing of a petition while invoking extraordinary writ jurisdiction by the petitioners runs in direct conflict with section 15 of the Act of 1988.

High Court Restrains J&K Administration From Issuing Caste Certificates To Saini Community

Case Title: Members of Saini Community Th. Suksham Singh Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 303

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh prohibited the Union Territory Administration from granting caste certificates to individuals belonging to the Saini Community until the government definitively establishes their status as a socially disadvantaged and underprivileged group.

Justice Rajnesh Oswal passed these directions while hearing a plea moved by the members of the Saini community assailing their inclusion as a weak and underprivileged (social caste) by way of a Government order dated October 19, 2022.

Judgment In Rem Extends Benefits To All Similarly Situated Employees, Denying Them Violates Articles 14 & 16: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mehmooda Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 304

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that when a set of employees is given a particular relief by a Court of law, all identically situated persons would need to be treated alike by extending the said benefits to them as well.

The court further clarified that the extension of such benefits would be irrespective of whether they approached the court during their active service or not.

Rigid Constraints Of Formal Pleadings Need Not Be Strictly Adhered To In A Claim Plea Under Motor Vehicles Act: J&K High Court

Case Title: The New India Assurance Co. Ltd Vs Safder Ali

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 305

Dismissing an appeal challenging an award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High court reitrated that in a claim petition submitted under the Motor Vehicles Act, the rigid constraints of formal pleadings need not be strictly adhered to.

A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani clarified that it is not mandatory for a claimant to explicitly enumerate all the details in the petition, hence allowing for a more flexible approach in presenting the case.

Merely Affixing Notice On Outer Building Not Substantial Compliance With Service Unless Credible Evidence Shown: J&K High Court

Case Title: Subash Choudhary Vs J&K Special Tribunal Jammu

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 306

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that merely affixing a notice on the outer part of a building structure would not be substantial compliance with actual service under Section 7(2) of the J&K Control of Building Operations Act, 1988.

In allowing the plea, a single bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani held:

"No doubt Section 7(2) provides the mode of service of notice upon the violator by affixing the same on the outer door of some conspicuous part of the unauthorizedly raised building providing that such affixing of notice would be deemed to have been duly served upon the violator, yet mere affixing of notice on the outer conspicuous part of the building cannot said to be substantial compliance of the actual service of notice and thus the theory of communication of such a notice cannot, in law, be invoked unless it is by credible evidence shown that the notice was actually affixed at site.".

NEET PG | Special 'Stray Vacancy' Round Not For Upgradation, Only Meant For Candidates Who Were Not Allotted Any Seats: J&K High Court

Case Title: NADEEM UR REHMAN & OTHERS Vs UT OF J&K & OTHERS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 307

Clarifying the mandate of Stray Round in NEET PG counselling the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that the Special Stray Vacancy Round does not function as an upgradation round, and individuals who have already secured seats in prior rounds are ineligible for any upgradation opportunities.

In dismissing the review plea, a bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar added that the Special Stray Vacancy Round of counselling comes into play only when certain seats persistently remain unoccupied after the culmination of all preceding counselling rounds and is hence exclusively accessible to candidates who were not allotted any seats, either in the All India Quota or the State Quota.

Territorial Challenges Do Not Undermine Core Jurisdiction: J&K High Court Says Untimely Jurisdictional Objections Cannot Invalidate Decrees

Case Title: M/s Oikos India Pvt. Ltd Vs M/s K.C. Hotels Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 308

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that objections on territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction, if not raised at the appropriate juncture, cannot be subsequently introduced in proceedings.

In such instances, a decree rendered without timely jurisdictional objections was not deemed null and void since challenges related to the territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction were not considered foundational or striking at the Court's core of jurisdiction, Justice Rajesh Sekhri explained.

MV Act | Apportionment Of Compensation Not Guided by Personal Laws, Consideration Of Dependency On Deceased Paramount: J&K High Court

Case Title: Zareefa Banoo Vs Manzoor Ahmad Sheergujri

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 309

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the Court cannot be guided by personal law while deciding on the compensation in a claim petition since it needed to be apportioned by taking into consideration the dependency of the Claimants.

Justice M.A Chowdhary clarified that only if any Claimant dies before being awarded compensation of his share, the same may be released among his legal heirs as per applicable laws of inheritance.

Domestic Violence Act Doesn't Provide Windfalls, Concrete Evidence Regarding Income Needed For Fair Assessment Of Maintenance: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mahroz Akhter Vs Dr Azmat Gouhar

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 310

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has observed that concrete evidence regarding the salary amount of the husband must be made known to the trial court so that it can pass a direction for a specific amount of maintenance payable by the husband under the Domestic Violence Act.

Emphasising the need for concrete evidence of the husband's salary before quantifying maintenance, Justice Puneet Gupta observed,

"The court cannot pass in air the direction that the wife shall be entitled to 25% of the gross salary without knowing the actual salary of the husband. The trial court is required to have the income of the husband of the applicant-wife and then pass the order of maintenance as deemed fit in the light of the salary or other income of the husband”.

High Court Slams Kashmir Health Services Director With ₹2 Lakh Fine For 'Frivolous Litigation,' 20 Yr Delay In Executing Decree

Case Title: Director Health Services and Another Vs. Iqbal Ahmad Baqal

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 311

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court slapped a fine of Rs. 2 lakh on the Director Health Services Kashmir for indulging in frivolous litigation to stall the execution of a decree passed against them in 2003.

In a scathing order passed by Justice Atul Sreedharan, the court dismissed the plea, imposed costs, and observed that the department's "repeated frivolous litigation" had kept the decree-holder hanging for 20 years and amounted to "abuse of process".

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.

Unexplained Delay In Detention Order Execution Raises Doubt On Detaining Authority's Subjective Satisfaction: J&K High Court

Case Title: OWAIS SYED KHAN Vs UT OF J&K & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 321

Upholding basic rights and safeguards against arbitrary detention, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a detention order of a detenue citing an unexplained delay in executing the order as casting doubt on the detaining authority's genuine concerns.

Allowing a Habeas Corpus petition Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

“When there is an unsatisfactory and unexplained delay in executing the order of detention, such delay would throw considerable doubt on the genuineness of the subjective satisfaction recorded by the detaining authority. This would lead to a legitimate inference that the detaining authority was not really and genuinely satisfied as regards the necessity for detaining the detinue”.

Necessary To Read S. 37 NDPS Act Subject To Fundamental Right To Life & Liberty Guaranteed U/Article 21: J&K High Court

Case Title: Bashir Ahmad Bhat Vs Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 322

In a delicate balancing act, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the stringent bail restrictions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, but crucially acknowledged the fundamental right to a speedy trial enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution.

Emphasising the necessity to interpret Section 37 of the NDPS Act in harmony with the fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, Justice Sanjeev Kumar referenced Mohammad Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi), reported as 2023 and observed,

“..With a view to save the constitutionality of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, it is necessary to read Section 37 of the NDPS Act subject to the fundamental right of life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India”.

'No Vested Right To Continue': J&K High Court Denies Relief To Contractual Doctor Seeking Service Extension Post COVID Hospitals Closure

Case Title: Aabid Rashid Vs Union Territory of Jammu And Kashmir

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 323

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled against a petition filed by 116 doctors and medical staff who sought to continue their services at temporary Covid hospitals even after they were closed down.

Dismissing their plea for seeking an extension of their services Justice MA Chowdhary observed,

“The contractual employment has no vested right to continue and it is not open for the Courts to direct an employer to continue the contract or to change the status of the contractual employment in any manner, once the same has been accepted by consent of both the sides without any demur”.

Can't Convict Drug Manufacturer Twice For Same Violation Even If Substandard Drug Samples Lifted From Different Places: J&K High Court

Case Title: Kumar Wanchoo Vs Drug Inspector Manufacturing, Kashmir Division,

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 324

Delivering a sigh of relief for a pharmaceutical company caught in the double-bind of double jeopardy, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court said that the mandate of Section 300 of CrPC read with Article 20 (2) of the Constitution of India clearly instructs that person once convicted or acquitted for the commission of offence cannot be tried subsequently for the same offence.

Payment of Compound Interest Under MSMED Act Supersedes All Agreements And Laws: J&K High Court

Case Title: Union Territory of J&K V/s Northern Transformers

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 325

Underscoring the statutory nature of compound interest under Section 16 of the MSMED Act, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the payment of compound interest under this section is mandatory and the same supersedes any conflicting terms in contracts or existing laws.

A bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed,

“This condition of payment of compound interest on failure of the buyer to make the payment on the date it becomes due, is statutory in character and overrides any stipulation in the agreement made between the buyer and the supplier. It also overrides any such stipulation with regard to interest made in any law for the time being in force”.

S. 22 POCSO Act| Child Can't Be Prosecuted For Perjury For False Allegations Of Rape: J&K High Court

Case Title: UT of J&K Vs X

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 326

Emphasising the protection of minors in cases involving false allegations of rape the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a minor cannot be prosecuted for perjury for making false allegations of rape.

Citing Section 22 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) Act, protecting children from punishment for false information Justice Rajesh Oswal observed,

“A perusal of the Section 22(2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act would reveal that if a false complaint has been made or false information has been provided by a child, no punishment shall be imposed upon such child”.

Contractual Employees Can't Be Terminated Without A Fair Hearing When Dismissal Order Is Stigmatic: J&K High Court

Case Title: Feroz Ahmed Sheikh Vs Union Territory of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 327

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that even contractual appointments cannot be terminated without affording an opportunity for a hearing if the termination is based on allegations of misconduct that cast a stigma on the employee.

Addressing the disengagement of employees from the J&K Handicrafts Corporation Justice M A Chowdhary observed,

“If an order is founded on allegations, the order is stigmatic and punitive and services of an employee cannot be dispensed with without affording him an opportunity of defending the accusations/allegations made against him in a full-fledged inquiry”.

'Sufficient Cause' In Limitation Act Can't Be Liberally Construed For Govt Departments : J&K High Court

Case Title: Union of India Vs Jagjeet Kour.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 328

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the expression "sufficient cause" in Section 5 of the Limitation Act cannot be liberally construed just because a government department is seeking condonation of delay.

The court emphasized that government departments are equally bound by the law of limitation and must provide cogent and plausible explanations for delays.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani made these observations while dismissing an application seeking condonation of a 65-day delay in filing a review petition by the Union of India.

Appeals, Second Appeals & Suits Connected By An Intrinsic Unity, To Be Regarded As One Legal Proceeding: J&K High Court

Case Title: University of Kashmir through Registrar V/s Prof. Gh. Nabi Sidiqi and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 329

Underscoring the interrelated nature of legal remedies, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that appeals are not separate proceedings but rather continuations of the original suits.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani, delivering the judgment, emphasized that appeals, second appeals, and suits are interconnected steps in a unified legal pursuit of justice. Hence an appellate Court possesses the same powers and discharges the same duties as that of the original Court, entitling the appellate Court to review the evidence as a whole subject to statutory limitations, if any, and to come to its own conclusions, he added.

No Binding Contract in Tender Participation, Process Cancellable Before Acceptance Letter Is Issued: J&K High Court

Case Title: Ghulam Qadir Bhat and another V/s U.T of J&K and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 330

Upholding the cancellation of a controversial sheep/goat procurement tender by the Sheep Husbandry Department, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that merely by participating in the tender, no right is created in favour of the bidder and the tenderer cannot be precluded from its option to cancel the tendering process on any grounds.

A bench of Justice Sindhu Sharma has further clarified that the tendering process, thus, can be cancelled at any stage before finalisation and issuance of a letter of acceptance as there was no concluded contract between the parties.