Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Quarterly Digest: October To December 2024

Hallmark v. Jammu & Kashmir GST Department & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 272

Sabahat Sanna Vs Dr Shabir Ahmad 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 273

Sudhir Power Limited v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 274

Pawan Kumar Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 275

Syed Tassadque Hussain Vs Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 276

Oriental Insurance Company Vs M/S Shalimar Wine Shop 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 277

Suraj Prakash Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 278

UT Of J&K Vs Mudasir Farooq Malik 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 279

Mohammad Iqbal Mir and others Vs State of J&K and others 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 280

State Of J&K Vs Rakesh Kumar 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 281

Dr Sumit Sabarwal Vs Dr Om Prakash Gupta 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 282

United India Insurance Company Vs Taja Begum 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 283

Shafqat Wani Vs Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 284

J&K High Court Bar Association, Srinagar, through, Arshad Andrabi Vs State Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 285

M/S Multi Trading Agencies v. UT of J&K (and connected matters) 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 286

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax V/s J & K Power Development Corporation Limited 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 287

Shivali Sharma Vs Army Public School Through Its President AWES 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 288

United Insurance Co Ltd Vs Fatima Begum 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 289

Mehmood Ur Rayaz Bhat Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 290

J&K State Forest Corporation Vs Sher Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 291

Ram Prasad Vs New India Assurance Co Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 292

Kuldeep Raj Dubey Vs Puneet Sharma 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 293

Imran Khan Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 294

Roshan Kumar Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 295

Chowdhary Piara Singh Vs Sat Pal 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 296

White Globe Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 297

Anu Bala Vs Rajesh Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 298

Mohammad Tajamul Masoodi Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 299

Muhammad Shafi Wani VS Muhammad Sultan Bhat 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 300

Zaka Chowdhary Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 301

Syed Shaifta Arifeen Balkhi Vs J&K Public Service Commission & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 302

Beero Devi Vs Kanchan Devi 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 303

Mohd Latif Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 304

Afrooza & Anr Vs Mohammad Aslam Dar 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 305

UT Of J&K Vs Sajad Ahmad Shah & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 306

Taxi Sumo Stand No 1 Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 307

Balwant Singh Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 308

State Of J&K Vs Abid Hussain 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 309

Chander Prabha Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 310

Presentation Convent Senior Secondary School Vs Satvinder Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 311

Joginder Singh Vs State & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 312

M/s Mir Associates Construction Company Vs. Superintending Engineer Hydraulic Circle Doda and Anr 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 313

M/s Pardeep Electricals and Building Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 314

Mohd Azam Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 315

Sardul Singh Vs Davinder Kour 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 316

Dilawar Javid Bhat Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 317

Abdul Majeed Lone Vs Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 318

Kewal Krishan Vs Sham Lal 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 319

Ajeet Kumar Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 320

Shenaz Begum th. Abdul Mazeed Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 321

UT Of J&K Vs Seema Koul & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 322

Sanjeev Gupta vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 323

UT Of J&K Vs Showkat Ali 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 324

X Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 325

Ravinder Singh Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 326

Union of India Vs M/S Sharma Construction Co. Akhnoor District Jammu 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 327

State Of J&K Vs Mohammad Sayidullah Bhat 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 328

Peerzada Mohd Yehya Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 329

Anand Vs Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 330

Shakeel Mohd Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 331

M/s Mir Sons Constructions Pvt. Ltd Vs. Union Territory of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 332

Govind Ram Vs Vidhya Devi 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 333

Pawan Singh Rathore Vs Devinder Singh Katoch 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 334

Shabnam Soodan Vs Seema Gupta 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 335

Avtar Krishan Suri V/s The Estate Manager, J&K Small Scale Industries Development Corporation Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 336

Building Operation Controlling Authority Vs Renu Gupta 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 337

Mohammad Altaf Bhat Vs Principal Chief of Commissioner and Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 338

Shafayatulla Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 339

Om Parkash and others Vs Khazoor Singh and another 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 340

Sardul Singh son of Joga Singh VS Davinder Kour wife of Gurinder Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 341

Vaishno Devi and ors Vs Commissioner Secy. to P.D.D. Department and ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 342

Sat Paul Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 343

UT Of J&K Vs Irfan Qayoom 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 344

J&K Bank Vs Abdul Majeed Bhat 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 345

Mohammad Subhan Shah Vs State Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 346

National Insurance Company Vs Lateef Ahmad Kohli & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 347

JAMKASH VEHICLEADS KASHMIR PVT LIMITED & ANR Vs. M/S WUERTH INDIA PVT. LTD. & ANR 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 348

Rakesh Kumar Mahajan Vs Sidharth Wazir and others 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 349

Aaqib Rashid Sofi Vs Chairman, Jammu and Kashmir Grameen Bank and others 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 350

Imran Rashid Rather Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 351

Raj Singh Gehlot Vs The Anti-Corruption Bureau 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 352

Ghulam Ahmad Bhat Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 353

Raj Singh Gehlot Vs The Anti-Corruption Bureau 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 354

Tarlok Chand Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 355

Umar Bashir Khan Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 356

Judgments/Orders:

Limitation For Refund Of GST Is Determined From Date Of Original Application, Not From Date Of Follow-Up Application: J&K HC Quashes Deficiency Memo

Case title: Hallmark v. Jammu & Kashmir GST Department & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 272

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the time limit for refund of GST is to be determined from the date the original application is filed by an assessee, and not from the date of follow-up application.

Temporary Residence Elsewhere Doesn't Alter Jurisdiction In Guardianship Petitions, It Depends On Ordinary Residence: J&K High Court

Case Title: Sabahat Sanna Vs Dr Shabir Ahmad

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 273

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reaffirmed that it is the ordinary place of residence of the minor which determines the jurisdiction of the Court in guardianship matters under Section 9 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 and temporary residence elsewhere at the time of filing the application does not alter this jurisdiction.

HC Upholds J&K Govt's Decision To Withdraw Budgetary Support Scheme 2018 For Reimbursement Of IGST To Manufacturing Units

Case title: Sudhir Power Limited v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 274

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the UT government's decision to withdraw the 'Budgetary Support Scheme', notified in the year 2018 for providing budgetary support to manufacturing units in the UT, by reimbursement of Integrated Goods and Service Tax.

A division bench of Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Rajesh Sekhri observed that the Scheme did not create any legitimate expectation in the units nor did it attract promissory estoppel on the government.

Though DNA Report Can Be Considered While Adjudicating Bail, Prosecution Can Contest Its Accuracy In Trial: J&K High Court

Case Title: Pawan Kumar Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 275

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized that while the prosecution and complainant retain the right to contest the accuracy of the DNA analysis during the trial, such a report can be considered in the context of a bail petition before the trial fully unfolds.

J&K High Court Dismisses PIL Challenging Public Safety Act as Not Maintainable, Cites Ongoing Adjudication On Similar Issue

Case Title: Syed Tassadque Hussain Vs Union Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 276

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, comprising Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice M A Chowdhary dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the validity of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act (PSA), 1978. The court declared the PIL non-maintainable, citing that the issue of detention of citizens under the PSA was already under judicial consideration, making this litigation a parallel and redundant proceeding.

Insurance Company Must Pay Full Insured Amount, Relief From Government Irrelevant: J&K High Court

Case Title: Oriental Insurance Company Vs M/S Shalimar Wine Shop

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 277

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an insurance company cannot reduce the payout to a claimant based on ex gratia relief received from the government.

Dismissing a Civil 1st Miscellaneous Appeal filed by an Insurance company against an award a bench of Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice M A Chowdhary emphasized,

"the Insurance Company is bound to pay the claim against the sum insured. It is not the business of the Insurance Company to see whether the person suffering damages has been paid some sort of relief from other sources or not."

Employee Of State Road Transport Corporation Entitled To Pay Revision And Benefits Of 5th And 6th Pay Commissions: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Suraj Prakash Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 278

Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, recognizing his entitlement to the pay revisions under the 5th and 6th Pay Commissions, despite his superannuation.

The court held that since the petitioner had been treated as a government employee for pension purposes, he was also entitled to the pay revisions granted under the relevant Statutory Rules and Orders (SROs).

O.37 R.3 CPC | Courts Can Allow Conditional Leave To Defend Summary Suits, With Terms Tailored To Specific Facts Of Each Case: J&K High Court

Case Title: UT Of J&K Vs Mudasir Farooq Malik

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 279

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that under Order 37 Rule III of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), courts retain the discretion to impose conditions on a defendant seeking leave to defend a summary suit.

A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani accentuated that this discretion is exercised based on the specific facts and circumstances of each case, and upon compliance with such terms, the defendant earns the right to defend the suit.

J&K Land Revenue Act | Divisional & Financial Commissioners Hold Concurrent Revision Powers U/S 15 Provided Fair Hearing Is Granted To Parties: HC

Case Title: Mohammad Iqbal Mir and others Vs State of J&K and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 280

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court set aside orders passed by the Divisional Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner in a land dispute case, emphasizing the necessity of granting a fair opportunity of hearing to parties affected by revisionary orders under the J&K Land Revenue Act, 1996.

Heated Exchange Between Couple/Family Members Over Non-Preparedness Of Food Not Sufficient To Prove Abetment To Suicide: J&K High Court

Case Title: State Of J&K Vs Rakesh Kumar

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 281

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a heated exchange between family members over domestic matters such as the preparation of food cannot be construed as abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC).

Is Letters Patent Appeal Maintainable Against Order Of Single-Judge In Criminal Jurisdiction?: J&K High Court Refers To Larger Bench

Case Title: Dr Sumit Sabarwal Vs Dr Om Prakash Gupta

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 282

To determine whether a Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent applicable to Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh is maintainable against an order or judgment passed by a Single Judge in criminal jurisdiction, the Division Bench of the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court referred the matter to the Chief Justice for further reference to a Larger Bench.

Vehicle's Proximity To Accident, Not Its Motion Is Key In Determining Liability Under Motor Vehicles Act: J&K High Court

Case Title: United India Insurance Company Vs Taja Begum

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 283

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the determination of whether an accident has arisen from the use of a motor vehicle depends on whether the accident was reasonably proximate to the vehicle's use, irrespective of whether the vehicle was in motion.

Motor Vehicles Act | Cover Note Issued U/S 145 Constitutes Valid 'Certificate Of Insurance' To Establish Insurance Liability: J&K High Court

Case Title: Shafqat Wani Vs Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 284

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that a Cover Note issued under Section 145 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MVA), constitutes a valid 'Certificate of Insurance', to establish the insurance liability.

While overturning a Tribunal's decision and holding the insurer liable to pay compensation for an accident that occurred within the policy's coverage period a bench of Justice M. A Chowdhary explained that a 'Certificate of Insurance' includes a Cover Note meeting the prescribed requirements and if multiple certificates are issued for a policy or a copy of a certificate is provided, all such certificates or copies are collectively considered part of the 'Certificate of Insurance.'

High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Amendment to Public Safety Act By 'J&K Bar Association, Srinagar' Due To Lack of Locus Standi

Case Title: J&K High Court Bar Association, Srinagar, through, Arshad Andrabi Vs State Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 285

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, comprising Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice M.A. Chowdhary dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the J&K High Court Bar Association, Srinagar. The PIL, which challenged the validity of the 2018 Amendment to the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act (PSA), was dismissed on the grounds of maintainability and lack of locus standi.

S.107(4) CGST Act | Appellate Authority Can't Condone Delay Beyond 30 Days In Filing Appeal But HC May Consider Exceptional Cases: J&K High Court

Case Title: M/S Multi Trading Agencies v. UT of J&K (and connected matters)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 286

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the Appellate Authority under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act/ J&K Goods and Services Tax Act cannot condone the delay in filing appeal beyond 30 days.

Notice U/S 271(1)(c) Of IT Act Must Specify Whether Penalty Is Against 'Concealment' Of Income Or Furnishing 'Incorrect' Income: J&K High Court

Case Title: Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax V/s J & K Power Development Corporation Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 287

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court made it clear that notice to an assessee proposing imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has to clearly specify whether assessee is accused of 'concealing' his income or furnishing 'incorrect' income particulars.

Army Public Schools Are Not 'State' Under Article 12, Employment Disputes Not Maintainable Under Writ Jurisdiction: J&K High Court

Case Title: Shivali Sharma Vs Army Public School Through Its President AWES

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 288

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that Army Public Schools (APS) and their governing body, the Army Welfare Education Society (AWES), do not qualify as the "State" under Article 12 of the Indian Constitution.

Consequently, a bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal clarified that employment disputes concerning APS teachers, governed by private contractual terms, cannot be challenged through writ jurisdiction under Article 226.

MV Act | Narrow Or Technical Interpretation Of “Income” Defeats Objective Of Providing Just Compensation To Victims, Dependents: J&K High Court

Case Title: United Insurance Co Ltd Vs Fatima Begum

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 289

Underscoring the importance of a balanced approach in determining compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized that the term “income” cannot be given a narrow or technical meaning, as such an approach defeats the objective of providing just compensation to victims and their dependents.

Denial Of Bail Must Be A Judicious Exception, Personal Liberty Under Article 21 'Too Precious' To Be Curtailed Casually: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mehmood Ur Rayaz Bhat Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 290

Reaffirming the fundamental value of personal liberty enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted absolute anticipatory bail to one accused in a case involving sexual offenses and harassment.

While making the interim pre arrest bail absolute in nature Justice Mohammad Yousuf Wani emphasized that the denial of bail is not a matter of routine and must only be exercised judiciously, with sensitivity to both individual and societal interests.

Objections To Pecuniary Jurisdiction Must Be Raised Early In Trial, Else Would Be Barred In Appeal Unless Failure of Justice Occurs: J&K High Court

Case Title: J&K State Forest Corporation Vs Sher Singh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 291

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that objections concerning the pecuniary limits of a court's jurisdiction must be raised at the earliest opportunity in the trial court. If not, they cannot be entertained by appellate or revisional courts, unless the oversight caused a failure of justice, as prescribed under Section 21 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), the court elucidated.

Failure To Apply Statutes And Binding Precedents Constitutes Error Reviewable Under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC: J&K High Court

Case Title: Ram Prasad Vs New India Assurance Co Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 292

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that the failure to apply statutes and binding precedents constitutes a palpable legal flaw warranting review under Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

A bench of Justice M.A Chowdhary clarified that courts must adhere to applicable statutes and precedents, especially those laid down by the Supreme Court, to ensure judgments are free from errors.

"Attempt To Wreak Vengeance, Divert From Core Issues": J&K High Court Quashes Defamation Complaint

Case Title: Kuldeep Raj Dubey Vs Puneet Sharma

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 293

Quashing a defamation complaint, citing the improper use of judicial processes for personal vendetta the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court highlighted that judicial mechanisms cannot be exploited to satisfy personal egos or to pursue vengeance.

Arbitrarily Labelling Individuals As Habitual Offenders Not Only Taints Them But Also Impairs Their Fundamental Rights: J&K High Court

Case Title: Imran Khan Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 294

Quashing the police action of branding a Jammu resident as a history-sheeter and entering his name in the Surveillance Register the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court underscored that the arbitrary labeling of individuals as habitual offenders without due process not only taints their image but also impairs their fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Unexplained & Unsatisfactory Delay In Executing Detention Order Raises Doubts About Detaining Authority's Subjective Satisfaction: J&K High Court

Case Title: Roshan Kumar Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 295

The Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh High Court quashed a preventive detention order observing that the unexplained and unsatisfactory delay in executing the detention order raised doubts about the genuineness of the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction.

Judgments/Orders:

S.139 NI Act | Once Complainant Proves That Cheque Was Issued By Accused To Discharge Debt, Burden Shifts On Accused: J&K High Court

Case Title: Chowdhary Piara Singh Vs Sat Pal

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 296

Spotlighting the critical shift in evidentiary burden under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that once the complainant proves that a cheque was issued by the accused to discharge a debt, Section 139 mandates that the burden of proof shifts to the accused.

High Court Directs Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh Authorities To Ensure Smooth Movement Of Ambulances For Public Health Emergencies

Case Title: White Globe Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 297

Aiming to streamline emergency medical transportation, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court mandated the Union Territories (UTs) of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh to develop a mechanism for ensuring hassle-free ambulance movement across both UTs.

While closing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) a bench composed of Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice Puneet Gupta, underscored the critical need for rapid medical response systems in public health emergencies.

Complainant Or Dependents Must Be Issued Notice And Heard When Accused Seeks Bail Under SC/ST Act: J&K High Court

Case Title: Anu Bala Vs Rajesh Singh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 298

Shedding light on the right of a victim under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court asserted that a complainant or their dependent must be issued notice and heard when an accused seeks bail under the Act.

Citing provisions of the Act a bench of Justice M. A Chowdhary observed,

“On a harmonious reading of both the Sub-sections (3) and (5) of Section 15-A of the Act, it can be safely concluded that on filing of a bail application for being released in a case under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act, the complainant or his dependent is to be issued a notice or is required to be heard at the time of consideration of bail plea”

Careful Consideration Of Grounds On Which Bail Has Been Granted To Detenue Is Critical In Preventive Detention Cases: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohammad Tajamul Masoodi Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 299

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that when bail is granted not on the merits of the case but due to procedural defaults under Section 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code or for urgent temporary purposes, such grounds might not favor the detainee.

A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal ruled that in these cases, authorities may view such circumstances as further justification for preventive detention, provided other criteria are met.

For Offence U/S 504 IPC, Insult Must Provoke Complainant To Breach Public Peace Or Commit Offence: J&K High Court

Case Title: Muhammad Shafi Wani VS Muhammad Sultan Bhat

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 300

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court, in a recent judgment, quashed the complaint and proceedings against an accused, holding that the provisions under Sections 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) were not substantiated by the complaint's allegations.

The court, exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, underscored the necessity of specific allegations to sustain a charge under Section 504, IPC, which addresses intentional insult aimed at provoking breach of peace.

Comparing Evaluation Methods Of J&K Public Service Commission With UPSC Lies Beyond Domain Of Judicial Review: High Court

Case Title: Zaka Chowdhary Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 301

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that determining the effectiveness of evaluation methods used in competitive examinations, such as those by the Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission (JK PSC), compared to those by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), is a matter best left to experts.

J&K Reservation Rules | 4% Quota For Physically Challenged Persons Is Overall Horizontal Reservation, Not Compartmentalised: High Court

Case Title: Syed Shaifta Arifeen Balkhi Vs J&K Public Service Commission & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 302

Resolving a significant question regarding reservation rules for physically challenged persons the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that the 4% reservation for physically challenged individuals, as outlined in the J&K Reservation Rules of 2005, constitutes an overall horizontal reservation, which applies broadly and does not operate as a compartmentalised category-specific quota.

CRPC | Magistrate Need Not Pass Detailed Order At Process Issuance Stage, Application Of Mind Is Crucial: J&K High Court

Case Title: Beero Devi Vs Kanchan Devi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 303

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that while a formal or reasoned order is not mandatory when a Magistrate issues a process under Sections 190/204 of the Criminal Procedure Code, it is crucial that the Magistrate's order shows an indication of thoughtful consideration of the matter.

Power To Attest/Annul Mutation Is Quasi-Judicial, Natural Justice Must Be Adhered To While Invoking It: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohd Latif Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 304

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized that the authority to attest or annul a mutation is quasi-judicial in nature. Such authority, vested in Revenue Officers, must be exercised in strict compliance with the J&K Land Revenue Act, ensuring an opportunity for the affected parties to be heard in line with natural justice principles, the court underscored.

Family Courts Must Strive For Settlement With Balanced Approach, Avoid Procrastination & Haste: J&K High Court

Case Title: Afrooza & Anr Vs Mohammad Aslam Dar

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 305

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized the role of family courts under the Family Courts Act, 1984, asserting that these courts must strive to mediate and help the parties reach a fair settlement.

While adjudicating upon a matter under the Act a bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani underscored that family courts are equipped to follow procedures they deem suitable to encourage amicable resolution, balancing swift action with thoughtful deliberation in family disputes. Sensitivity to the parties' circumstances is paramount, as per the Act, reflecting its core objective of fair and compassionate adjudication, he stressed.

J&K CSR | Absence From Duty Regardless Of Duration Does Not Mean Automatic Job Termination, Right To Hearing Is Essential: High Court

Case Title: UT Of J&K Vs Sajad Ahmad Shah & Anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 306

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh underscored the right to a hearing for employees who are absent from duty, ruling that absence, irrespective of duration, does not automatically end employment.

A bench of Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Rajesh Sekhri cited Regulation 113 of J&K Civil Service Regulation (CSR) and observed,

“Absence from duty, howsoever long, cannot result in automatic cessation of employment. In all such cases, the person concerned has to be given an opportunity of hearing and depending on the nature of defence taken by him, further action should be taken”

Sites Intended To Function As Bus Or Taxi Stands Must Be Officially Notified By Govt After Consulting Local Authorities: J&K High Court

Case Title: Taxi Sumo Stand No 1 Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 307

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that any site intended to function as a bus or taxi stand must be officially notified by the government or an authorized officer, who is required to consult local authorities beforehand.

A Division bench of Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Rajesh Sekhri underscored that if the proposed stand falls within the jurisdiction of a local body, such as a municipal council, the consent of that authority is mandatory before designating the location as a stand for contract carriages.

Statements In Newspapers Are Merely Hearsay & Cannot Serve As Proven Facts Unless Corroborated By Author: J&K High Court

Case Title: Balwant Singh Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 308

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that statements in newspapers are merely hearsay and cannot serve as proven facts unless corroborated by the author.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

“The assertion made in a newspaper cannot be treated as proved facts reported therein. A statement of fact contained in a newspaper is merely hearsay and, in the absence of statement of the maker of the news report, the same cannot be relied upon as a proved fact”

HC Has Duty To Maintain Accurate Records Within Its Jurisdiction To Ensure Justice Prevails In Accordance With Law: J&K High Court

Case Title: State Of J&K Vs Abid Hussain

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 309

Reiterating that the High Court, as a court of record, derives its power to review judgments under Article 215 of the Constitution of India the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized its obligation and duty to maintain accurate records within its jurisdiction, ensuring justice prevails in accordance with the law.

Alteration Of Settlement Records Impermissible Unless Registered Instrument Is Produced Before Relevant Officer Or Court: J&K High Court

Case Title: Chander Prabha Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 310

Reiterating that a transfer of immovable property cannot be deemed valid unless it is executed in writing and registered as per the provisions of the Registration Act the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized that the alteration of settlement records is impermissible unless a registered instrument is produced before the relevant Revenue or Settlement Officer or Court.

Govt Recognised Private Schools May Fall Under Writ Jurisdiction, But Writ Of Mandamus Limited To Public Law Actions: J&K High Court

Case Title: Presentation Convent Senior Secondary School Vs Satvinder Singh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 311

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that while unaided private educational institutions recognized by the government or affiliated to statutory boards may qualify as “public authorities” amenable to writ jurisdiction, a writ of mandamus can only be issued if the actions of such institutions fall within the domain of public law rather than private law.

J&K High Court Directs Govt To Create 334 Judicial Posts Within 60 Days, Emphasises Binding Nature Of Directive

Case Title: Joginder Singh Vs State & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 312

Asserting that recommendations by the High Court or its Chief Justice regarding the creation of posts are binding on the government the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has directed the Union Territory (UT) of J&K to create 334 posts in various judicial categories within 60 days, emphasizing the judiciary's autonomy and the government's obligation to comply.

Fresh Arbitrator Can Be Appointed By Court U/S 14 Of Arbitration Act If Proposed Arbitrator Is Ineligible U/S 12(5): J&K And Ladakh HC

Case Title: M/s Mir Associates Construction Company Vs. Superintending Engineer Hydraulic Circle Doda and Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 313

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench of Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan affirmed that when the arbitration clause is found to be foul with the amended section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act, the appointment of the arbitrator would be beyond the pale of the arbitration agreement. In such eventuality, the court can be approached under section 14 of the Arbitration Act for seeking substitution of the arbitrator.

Petition U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Is Maintainable If Statutory Remedy Before Invoking Arbitration Clause Is Exhausted: J&K And Ladakh HC

Case Title: M/s Pardeep Electricals and Building Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 314

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench of Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan has held that once the statutory remedy under contract is exhausted, arbitration clause can be invoked and appointment of the arbitrator can be sought under section 11 of the Arbitration Act.In this case, the respondent had to constitute Dispute resolution Board (DRB) within 30 days after execution of the contract for resolving any dispute arising between the parties but no DRB was constituted.

Preventive Detention Must Be Invoked With All Due Care And Circumspection: J&K High Court Quashes Detention Order

Case Title: Mohd Azam Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 315

Underscoring the sacrosanct nature of personal liberty, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh quashed a preventive detention order, terming it as a product of non-application of mind and procedural lapses.

The Court emphasized that preventive detention, an extraordinary measure, requires meticulous care and caution as it involves the deprivation of an individual's most cherished rights.

Res Judicata Not Applicable To Domestic Violence Proceedings Where Circumstances Justify Filing Second Petition: J&K High Court

Case Title: Sardul Singh Vs Davinder Kour

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 316

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has clarified that the principles of res judicata or analogous provisions of the Civil Procedure Code cannot restrict proceedings under the Domestic Violence (DV) Act if the aggrieved person provides valid reasons for filing a second petition after withdrawing the earlier one.

Powers Of Divisional Commissioners To Detain Under PITNDPS Remain Intact Even In Post-Reorganization Phase: J&K High Court Clarifies

Case Title: Dilawar Javid Bhat Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 317

Dismissing a petition challenging a detention order under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (PITNDPS Act) the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that the authority of the Divisional Commissioners to issue detention orders under PITNDPS remains intact despite the J&K Reorganization Act, 2019, unless specifically superseded by corresponding Central laws.

Right To Property Is A Human Right: J&K High Court Orders Rental Compensation To Landowner For 45 Yr Long Illegal Occupation

Case Title: Abdul Majeed Lone Vs Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 318

Reaffirming that the right to property is fundamental to human dignity and cannot be compromised without legal process and fair compensation, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court directed the Union of India to pay rental compensation to Abdul Majeed Lone, a Tangdhar landowner whose property has been under military occupation since 1978 without due process.

Errors Which Are Not Self-Evident, Have To Be Detected Cannot Justify Invoking Power Of Review Under O.47 R.1 CPC: J&K High Court

Case Title: Kewal Krishan Vs Sham Lal

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 319

Defining the boundaries of judicial review the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has emphasised that errors not evident on the face of the record cannot justify review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC).

A bench of Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul held, “An error that is not self-evident and has to be detected by a process of reasoning can hardly be said to be an error apparent on the face of record justifying the court to exercise its power of review under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC”

Approaching HC For Bail U/S 483 BNSS Without Approaching Trial Court Unnecessarily Burdens HC: J&K High Court

Case Title: Ajeet Kumar Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 320

Criticising the growing trend of directly approaching the High Court for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that bypassing the trial courts in such matters not only burdens the High Court but also disregards the legal protocol, where such petitions should typically be first addressed by the courts below.

"Suffering From Schizophrenia, No Purpose In Continued Custody": J&K High Court Grants Bail To Woman Accused Of Killing 3-Month Old Son

Case Title: Shenaz Begum th. Abdul Mazeed Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 321

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted bail to one Shenaz Begum, accused of murdering her three-month-old son in 2021 observing that the applicant's schizophrenia diagnosis and the absence of a plausible motive rendered her continued judicial custody purposeless.

Kashmiri Pandit Woman Continues To Retain Migrant Status Despite Marriage To Non-Migrant: J&K High Court

Case Title: UT Of J&K Vs Seema Koul & Anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 322

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that a Kashmiri Pandit woman does not lose her "migrant status" upon marrying a non-migrant.

A bench of Justices Atul Sreedharan and Mohammad Yousuf Wani clarified, “.. to hold that the woman would lose her status as a migrant only because she, out of the natural urge of forming a family, had to marry a non-migrant on account of existing circumstances, would be grossly discriminatory and militates against the very concept of justice. This discrimination becomes even more brazen where a male migrant continues to remain a migrant notwithstanding the fact that he has married a non-migrant”

Unregistered Agreement Insufficient To Transfer Leasehold Rights, Housing Board's Procedure Paramount: J&K High Court

Case Title: Sanjeev Gupta vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 323

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reaffirmed that an unregistered agreement to sell is inadequate to transfer leasehold rights, emphasizing the exclusive procedure of the J&K Housing Board for such transfers.

"False In One, False In All" Doctrine Doesn't Apply In India: J&K High Court Partially Overturns Acquittal In 24-Yr-Old Assault Case

Case Title: UT Of J&K Vs Showkat Ali

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 324

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh reaffirmed that the doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus—"false in one thing, false in everything" is inapplicable in Indian courts.

Instead, the court comprising Justices Rajnesh Oswal and Sanjay Dhar emphasized the necessity of carefully sifting through evidence, separating unreliable portions while relying on credible and corroborated testimony.

[Air Force Act] Choice Between Court Martial & Criminal Court Can Only Be Exercised After Probe & Before Magistrate's Cognizance: J&K High Court

Case Title: X Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 325

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that discretion under Section 124 of the Air Force Act, 1950, to choose between a court-martial and a criminal court, can only be exercised after the police investigation is complete and before the Magistrate takes cognizance of the case.

Medical Testimony Not Merely Corroborative But Independent Evidence, May Establish Facts Apart From Other Oral Evidence: J&K High Court

Case Title: Ravinder Singh Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 326

Highlighting the critical role of medical evidence in criminal trials, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed, that the evidence of a medical witness is very crucial to corroborate the case of prosecution and it is not merely a check upon testimony of eyewitnesses as it is also independent testimony because it may establish certain facts, quite apart from the other oral evidence.

Interest On Awarded Amount Cannot Exceed Rate Of 6% As Provided U/S 30(7) Of J&K Arbitration Act: High Court

Case Title: Union of India Vs M/S Sharma Construction Co. Akhnoor District Jammu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 327

The Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court bench of Justice M A Chowdhary held that section 30(7) of the Jammu and Kashmir Arbitration Act, 1997 which was amended in 2010 is retrospective in nature. The interest on the awarded amount cannot exceed the rate of 6% per annum as provided in the section.

CPC | Second Appeals Must Strictly Comply With S.100 CPC, No Scope For Equitable Grounds Or Disturbing Concurrent Findings: J&K High Court

Case Title: State Of J&K Vs Mohammad Sayidullah Bhat

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 328

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that conditions under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) must be strictly fulfilled before a second appeal can be maintained. The Court reiterated that a second appeal cannot be decided on equitable grounds, nor can concurrent findings of fact be disturbed by the High Court merely because they are erroneous.

Victim's Right To Participate Is Vital, But Hearing May Not Be Essential in Certain Cases Before Granting Relief: J&K High Court

Case Title: Peerzada Mohd Yehya Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 329

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, while granting interim bail to an accused has emphasised that although a victim has the right to participate in criminal proceedings at all stages, there are instances where hearing the victim may not be necessary before granting relief.

Justice Sanjay Dhar observed that if notifying the victim could defeat the purpose of the relief sought, the court may proceed to grant interim protection in such cases.

Constable With Colour Blindness Could Cause Danger To Public: J&K High Court Upholds Dismissal Of Constables From BSF

Case Title: Anand Vs Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 330

Emphasising the critical role of physical fitness in armed forces, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed petitions challenging the termination of two Border Security Force (BSF) constables diagnosed with colour blindness.

Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul upheld their dismissal, observing that such a condition could potentially endanger public safety due to the nature of their duties.

Illegal Smuggling Of Bovine Animals Not Only Law & Order Issue But Also Threatens Maintenance Of Public Order: J&K High Court

Case Title: Shakeel Mohd Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 331

Highlighting the grave repercussions of bovine smuggling on public order, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed against a preventive detention order issued under the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978.

Petition U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Entertained After Lapse Of 3 Yrs From Date Of Cause Of Action Arising: J&K High Court

Case Title: M/s Mir SonsConstructions Pvt. Ltd Vs. Union Territory of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 332

The Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court bench of Justice Tashi Rabstan held that the petition under section 11 of the Arbitration Act cannot be entertained after lapse of 3 years from the date of cause of action having arisen.

O.14 R.5 CPC | Courts Can Amend Or Strike Out Issues Anytime Before Decree, But Must Hear Parties And Allow Evidence: J&K High Court

Case Title: Govind Ram Vs Vidhya Devi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 333

Shedding light on the on the scope of judicial discretion under Order 14 Rule 5(1) and (2) of the CPC, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that courts have the authority to amend, add, or strike out issues at any stage of a suit before a decree is passed.

Public Servant Exceeding Powers While Performing Official Duties Would Be Protected U/S 197 CrPC: J&K High Court

Case Title: Pawan Singh Rathore Vs Devinder Singh Katoch

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 334

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) provides protection not only for acts performed by public servants in the discharge of their official duties but also for those done in the purported discharge of such duties.

Courts Must Balance Citizen's Rights & Adherence To Timelines, Delay Must Not Be Exploited: J&K High Court

Case Title: Shabnam Soodan Vs Seema Gupta

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 335

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court underscored the necessity of distinguishing between genuine explanations for delays and inordinate, unexplained delays in judicial matters.

The Court held that while it has a duty to protect citizens' rights, it must remain vigilant against allowing parties to misuse the system by approaching courts at their convenience without sufficient cause.

Appointment Of Managing Director/Chairman Of Party As Arbitrator Is Prohibited U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act: J&K High Court

Case Title: Avtar Krishan Suri V/s The Estate Manager, J&K Small Scale Industries Development Corporation Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 336

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench of Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan held that managing director or chairman of a party to the arbitration agreement cannot be appointed as Arbitrator in light of section 12(5) read with Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration Act.

J&K COBA 1988 | Authorities Cannot Exceed Grounds Specified In Show Cause Notice When Taking Action Against An Individual: High Court

Case Title: Building Operation Controlling Authority Vs Renu Gupta

Citation :2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 337

Reaffirming the foundational principle of administrative law that actions taken against individuals must strictly adhere to the grounds specified in the show cause notice the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that authorities cannot transgress the boundaries of the notice as such transgressions undermine the principles of natural justice and render subsequent actions legally unsustainable.

Internal Complaint Committee Cannot Entertain Complaints Filed Beyond Three Month Limitation Period Under POSH Act: J&K High Court

Mohammad Altaf Bhat Vs Principal Chief of Commissioner and Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 338

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an authority under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) lacks the jurisdiction to act upon and decide complaints filed beyond the condonable limitation period of three months, as provided under the second proviso to Section 9(1) of the Act.

Employer's Assessment Of Employee's Worth Is Final, Suitability Of An Individual For A Particular Post Cannot Be Scrutinized By Courts: J&K HC

Case Title: Shafayatulla Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 339

Emphasising that the assessment of an employee's worth and suitability must be left to the employer's bona fide decision the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that the suitability of an individual for a particular post and administrative exigencies cannot be scrutinized by courts.

Unregistered Agreement To Sell Confers Legal Right Upon Beneficiary To Seek Execution Of Subsequent Sale Instrument From Transferor: J&K HC

Case Title: Om Parkash and others Vs Khazoor Singh and another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 340

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an unregistered Agreement to Sell confers a legal right upon the beneficiary to seek the execution of a subsequent sale instrument from the transferor.

For this limited purpose, a suit based on such an agreement is maintainable under the law, the court stated while reaffirming the legal sanctity of such agreements in specific circumstances.

Domestic Violence Act Can Be Invoked For Past Domestic Relationships As Well: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Sardul Singh son of Joga Singh VS Davinder Kour wife of Gurinder Singh

Citation 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 341

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court has held that the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) can be invoked even in cases involving past domestic relationships where the parties have lived together in a shared household at any point in time.

Justice Sanjay Dhar clarified that the definition of "domestic relationship" under Section 2(f) of the DV Act is not confined to ongoing cohabitation but extends to relationships where shared residence existed previously.

J&K High Court Orders ₹11.63 Lakh Compensation To Family Of Electrician Electrocuted During Repair Work

Case Title: Vaishno Devi and ors Vs Commissioner Secy. to P.D.D. Department and ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 342

Upholding the principle of respondeat superior, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court awarded ₹11.63 lakh as compensation to the family of an electrician who lost his life due to electrocution while conducting repairs on an 11 KV power line.

In allowing a compensation petition of the family of the deceased electrician Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed,

“.. the petition succeeds and by issuance of writ of mandamus, the respondents are commanded to pay an amount of Rs. 11,63,000/- along with interest @7.5% per annum in favour of the petitioners from the date of filing of instant petition till the date of its actual payment”

Misconceived Consent Obtained On False Promise Of Marriage Constitutes Rape Under IPC: J&K High Court

Case Title: Sat Paul Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 343

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated the legal principle that a promise to marry made with no intention of fulfillment, which induces consent for sexual intercourse, amounts to consent obtained under a misconception of fact. Such consent, the Court emphasised, cannot be excused under Section 90 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and can lead to a conviction for rape under Sections 375 and 376 IPC.

“Undermines Faith Of Common Man In Criminal Justice”: J&K High Court Calls For SITs To Address “Casual Probes” In NDPS Cases

Case Title: UT Of J&K Vs Irfan Qayoom

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 344

Emphasising the urgent need for specialized investigative teams to handle cases under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that casual, unfair, and non-scientific investigations in NDPS cases creates a sense of insecurity and undermine the faith of the common man in the administration of the criminal justice.

Civil Courts Retain Exclusive Jurisdiction For Non-Industrial Disputes & Provide Alternative Remedies For Common Law Claims: J&K High Court

Case Title: J&K Bank Vs Abdul Majeed Bhat

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 345

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that if a dispute is not an industrial dispute nor relates to the enforcement of any rights under the Industrial Disputes Act (ID Act), the remedy lies exclusively in a civil court.

However, a bench of Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul clarified that if the dispute arises out of a right or liability under general or common law rather than the ID Act, the jurisdiction of the civil court becomes an alternative remedy, leaving the suitor the choice to pursue relief through either mechanism.

Proof Of Demand & Voluntary Acceptance Of Bribe Key For Conviction, Recovery Of Marked Currency Notes Not Sufficient: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohammad Subhan Shah Vs State Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 346

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the recovery of marked currency notes or a positive hand wash test, without proof of demand and voluntary acceptance of a bribe, cannot sustain a conviction under anti-corruption laws.

“There Has Been An Increase In Inflation:" J&K High Court Emphasises Revising 'Notional Income' Under Second Schedule Of Motor Vehicles Act

Case Title: National Insurance Company Vs Lateef Ahmad Kohli & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 347

Recognising the impact of inflation and the devaluation of currency over the years the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has emphasised the need to revise the notional income of non-earning persons as stipulated in the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar has observed that the notional income of ₹15,000, fixed in 1994, fails to reflect current economic realities and must be reassessed to ensure fair and just compensation for victims of road accidents.

Award Passed By Ineligible Arbitrator Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Jammu And Kashmir HC

Case Title: JAMKASH VEHICLEADS KASHMIR PVT LIMITED & ANR Vs. M/S WUERTH INDIA PVT. LTD. & ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 348

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar held that award passed by an ineligible arbitrator is liable to be set aside under section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

S.92 CPC | Leave Of Court Mandatory Prerequisite For Instituting Suit, Defect Cannot Be Cured Later: J&K High Court

Case Title: Rakesh Kumar Mahajan Vs Sidharth Wazir and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 349

Reinforcing the mandatory nature of Section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court stated that the leave of the court is a condition precedent for instituting a suit under this section.

A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani emphasized that a suit instituted without such prior leave is void ab initio, and the defect cannot be rectified later, terming it "basic and material."

J&K High Court Declares Grameen Bank's ₹2 Lakh Indemnity Bond Condition For New Appointees Void For Violating Banking Regulations

Case Title: Aaqib Rashid Sofi Vs Chairman, Jammu and Kashmir Grameen Bank and others.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 350

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a contentious indemnity bond condition imposed by the Jammu and Kashmir Grameen Bank (JKGB).

The court ruled that the condition, which mandated new appointees to execute an indemnity bond of ₹2,00,000 and allowed its encashment upon premature resignation, was not only unauthorized under the Regional Rural Bank Regulations 2010 but also contrary to principles of fairness and public policy.

Specific Instances Verifiable By Statements Of Witnesses Essential To Establish “Subjective Satisfaction” For Issuing Detention Orders: J&K High Court

Case Title: Imran Rashid Rather Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 351

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the grounds of detention disclosing specific instances verifiable by documents and/or statements of witnesses are essential to establish “subjective satisfaction,” and their absence vitiates detention orders.

Such was the finding of Justices Atul Sreedharan and Mohammad Yousuf Wani while setting aside the preventive detention of one Imran Rashid Rather under the Public Safety Act (PSA).

J&K Prevention Of Corruption Act | Mere Misuse Of Position By Public Servant Without Dishonest Intent Not 'Abuse' U/S 5(1)(d): High Court

Case Title: Raj Singh Gehlot Vs The Anti-Corruption Bureau

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 352

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that mere misuse of position by a public servant, without dishonest intent, does not constitute abuse under Section 5(1)(d) of the J&K Prevention of Corruption Act. The court clarified that dishonest intent, aimed at securing a pecuniary advantage for oneself or others, is essential to attract the provision's mischief.

J&K High Court Reaffirms Quranic Injunctions, Secures Muslim Daughter's Inheritance Rights After 43-Year Legal Battle

Case Title: Ghulam Ahmad Bhat Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 353

Underscoring the sanctity of Quranic injunctions concerning inheritance rights the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled in favor of a Muslim woman's right to inherit her father's property, resolving a 43-year-long legal battle initiated by the late Mst. Mukhti. The court reaffirmed that the inheritance rights of daughters, as ordained in Surah An-Nisa of the Holy Quran, are inviolable and must be upheld without delay or prejudice.

No One Acquires Title To Property Through Gratuitous Occupation, Even If Possession Continues For Decades: J&K High Court

Case Title: Raj Singh Gehlot Vs The Anti-Corruption Bureau

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 354

Reaffirming a key principle of property law the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that individuals occupying premises gratuitously cannot claim ownership or legal protection.

Justice Sanjay Dhar clarified that the protection can only be granted or extended to a person who has a valid subsisting rent agreement, lease agreement or license agreement in his favour.

Correctness Of Emoluments In Final 24 Months Before Retirement Is Indisputable For Retiral Benefits: J&K High Court

Case Title: Tarlok Chand Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 355

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that emoluments drawn by an employee during the final 24 months of service cannot be questioned when calculating retiral benefits.

Citing Article 242 of the J&K CSR Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Puneet Gupta observed,

“.. the correctness of emoluments drawn by an employee before twenty four (24) months of his retirement cannot be disputed while calculating the retiral benefits of such employee”

"Be Sensitive": J&K High Court Urges Trial Courts To Avoid 'Copy-Paste' Practices In Bail Orders

Case Title: Umar Bashir Khan Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 356

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh stressed the necessity for judicial sensitivity and diligence in dealing with bail applications.

A bench Justice Sanjay Dhar has emphasized that courts must avoid the “copy-paste syndrome” that has infiltrated judicial proceedings, as such practices can compromise the fundamental rights of individuals.