Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Monthly Digest: August 2024

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Kailash Nath Vs Mukul Raj 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 244

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

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

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

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

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

Judgments/Orders:

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 208

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 209

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 210

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 211

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

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

Case Title: Fayaz Ahmad Mir Vs Nighat Nasreen

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 212

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

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

Case Title: Satya Prakash Arya Vs Syed Abid Jalali

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 213

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 214

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

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

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

Case Title: Manju Bhat Vs Dr Amit Wanchoo

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 215

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 216

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 217

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

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

Case Title: Abdul Rashid Yatoo Vs Abdul Gani Malik

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 218

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 219

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

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

Case Title: Abdul Qayoom Mugloo Vs Irfana & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 220

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 221

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 222

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 223

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

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

Case Title: Gautam Anand Vs Union Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 224

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 225

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 226

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

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

Case Title: Gourav Khajuria Vs UT of J&K

Citation :2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 227

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 228

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

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

Case Title: National Investigation Agency Vs Abid Mushtaq Mir

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 229

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

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

Case Title: Showkat Ali Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 230

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

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 231

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

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

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

Case Title: ROSHAN LAL TICKOO Vs PREDIMANT KRISHAN TICKOO

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 232

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

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

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 233

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

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

Case Title: Ahsan Ahmad Mirza Vs Directorate Of Enforcement

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 234

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

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

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

Case Title: SYED TAJAMUL BASHIR Vs MOHAMMAD AYOUB KHAN.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 235

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

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 236

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

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

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 237

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

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 238

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

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

Case Title: Aabid Nazir Zargar Vs Mehrajudin Kakroo

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 239

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

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

Case Title: Ashok Kumar Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 240

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 241

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

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

Case Title: Ghulam Hassan Khanyari Vs Riyaz Ahmad Bhat

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 242

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 243

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

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

Case Title: Kailash Nath Vs Mukul Raj

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 244

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

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

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

Case Title: State of J&K Vs Parshottam Singh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 245

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

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

Case Title: Abdul Rashid Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 246

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

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

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

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

Case Title: Mohammad Amin Mir Vs University Of Kashmir

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 247

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

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

Case Title: Mst Shameema Begum Vs Javid Iqbal Khan

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 248

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

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

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 249

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