Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup: December 8 - December 14, 2024

Sahil Gupta Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 1

Abdul Rahim Ganai V/s State of JK and others (SRTC) 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 2

Waqas Riyaz Khan Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 3

MOHAMMAD BIN SHORA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER 2024 LiveLaw (JK) 4

Pritam Chand alias Pritam Singh Vs Dr. Kamal Saini 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 5

Haja @ Hajira Bano Vs Gh. Mohammad Ahangar 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 6

Aman Gehlot Vs V/s Anti-Corruption Bureau (Central Kashmir) & ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 7

Mohammad Altaf Mir V/ S Firdous Ahmad Mir 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 8

Judgments/Orders:

Labour Commissioner Competent To Review Ex-Parte Awards Passed Under Workmen's Compensation Act: J&K High Court

Case Title: Sahil Gupta Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 1

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a Labour Commissioner is competent to review his ex-parte orders, while hearing an application to set aside such ex-parte award.

A bench of Justice M.A Chowdhary clarified that given the applicability of Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure(CPC), as provided under Rule 31 of the J&K Workmen's Compensation Rules of 1972, the Labor Commissioner is competent to review ex-parte awards.

Treating Employee's Absence As 'Dies-Non' A Penalty Measure, Cannot Be Imposed Without Affording Hearing: J&K High Court

Case Title:Abdul Rahim Ganai V/s State of JK and others (SRTC)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 2

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a period of willful absence from duty can be treated as 'Dies-Non', but such a measure of penalty cannot be imposed without conducting a fair enquiry and affording the concerned employee an opportunity to be heard.

For the period declared as 'Dies Non', an employee would not be eligible for allowance nor would it be counted for retiral benefits.

Justice Sindhu Sharma said,

“The order adverse to the employee for willfully remaining absent after expiry leave cannot be passed without initiated any disciplinary proceedings. The respondent is competent to direct the period of willful absence be treated as Dies Non but it would be as a measure of penalty and such order cannot be passed without holding enquiry and providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner”.

Subjective Satisfaction Under Preventive Detention Jurisdiction Cannot Rule Out Objectivity: J&K HC Quashes Detention Order

Case Title: Waqas Riyaz Khan Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 3

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed the detention order of a detenue citing serious concerns about the grounds of detention being based on a "caricatured" opinion instead of an objective assessment.

A bench of Justice Rahul Bharti has observed,

“If taken as it is, then any law abiding citizen can be stereotyped at the hands of law and enforcement agency/authority for the sake of being put behind the bars not for any penal act of omission and commission on his/her part amounting to violation of law but just for the reason that law and enforcement agency/authority is so profiling a person to be a bad person”.

J&K HC Allows Minors Plea For Passport Rectification Upon Attaining Majority, Directs Adherence To Ministry of External Affairs Guidelines

Case Title: MOHAMMAD BIN SHORA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JK) 4

Allowing a plea seeking directions to effect changes in the date of birth in the passport the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized that an applicant seeking a change in the date of birth in their passport must do so within a reasonable time, specifically within five years from the date of the passport's issuance, with certain exceptions for minors.

Press Should Refrain From Publishing Defamatory Content Against Private Citizen If It Serves No Public Interest: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Pritam Chand alias Pritam Singh Vs Dr. Kamal Saini.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 5

Cautioning the press from publishing contents that are manifestly defamatory against an individual, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that content published by the press should be duly verified and there should be sufficient reason to believe that it is true and serves the public good.

Debunking “Truth” as a defence for publishing defamatory material against a private citizen where no public interest is involved, Justice Vinod Chaterjee Koul remarked,

“...The press has the right to expose cases of corruption and irregularities in public bodies as a custodian of public interest but such reporting should be based on irrefutable evidence, published after due inquiry and verification from the concerned sources and should include the version of the person or authority being commented upon”.

O.6 R.17 CPC | Adopt Liberal Approach To Amendments Before Trial Unless It Causes Irreparable Prejudice To Opposite Party: J&K High Court

Case Title: Haja @ Hajira Bano Vs Gh. Mohammad Ahangar

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 6

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that courts must adopt a liberal approach and allow amendments under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) unless they cause irreparable prejudice to the other party or change the very nature of the suit.

A bench of Justice M A Chowdhary added that whenever an amendment is sought before the commencement of a trial, a lenient view may be taken keeping in mind that the opposite party would have a chance to meet the case set up by amendment.

LOCs Are Coercive Measures Interfering With Liberty, To Be Used Exceptionally Only When Accused Deliberately Evades Justice: J&K High Court

Case Title: Aman Gehlot Vs V/s Anti-Corruption Bureau (Central Kashmir) & ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 7

While quashing a Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against a businessman facing corruption charges, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that LOCs are not routine measures but exceptional tools used only when an accused deliberately evades justice or poses a flight risk.

A bench of Justice Sindhu Sharma observed,

“An LOC is a coercive measure to make a person surrender and consequentially interferes with petitioner's right of personal liberty and free movement. It is to be issued in cases where the accused is deliberately evading summons/arrest or where such person fails to appear in Court despite a Non-Bailable Warrant”.

Expedited Resolution In Summary Suits Cannot Come At The Cost Of Defendant's Fair Opportunity To Defend Himself: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohammad Altaf Mir V/ S Firdous Ahmad Mir

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 8

Shedding light on the principles governing the grant of leave to defend a summary suit, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that while the objective of summary suits is to expedite commercial disputes, this cannot come at the cost of denying the defendant a fair opportunity to defend himself.