Nominal Index:

Nayeem Rasool Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 102

Mohammad Ashraf Dar vs UT Of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 103

Ayaz Ahmad Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 104

Sheikh Shakeel Ahmed Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 105

M/S Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. Versus Assessing Authority Sales Tax Circle D Jammu 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 106

Land Owners of Village Suthsoo and others Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 107

Molvi Mohammad Amin Pala Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 108

UT of J&K Vs Pradeep Singh( Now Dead) 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 109

Farooq Ahmad Mir Vs Nisar Ahmad Wani and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 110

Ashok Kumar Vs CBI 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 111

Harbachan Singh Vs Sr. Superintendent of Police Srinagar and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 112

Muntazir Ahmad Bhat Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 113

Ghulam Ahmad Mir Vs J&K Bank & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 114

Hem Raj Vs Union of India & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 115

Shamim Ahmed Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 116

Seema Phull and another Naina Sodi and others Vs United India Insurance Company and another 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 117

Union Of India Vs Madan Lal & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 118

Bachan Lal. Vs J&K Special Tribunal 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 119

Nissar Ahmad Shah Vs Union of India & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 120

Abdul Aziz Bhat & Ors Vs Hilal Ahmad Bhat 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 121

National India Insurance Vs Jagjeet Singh 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 122

Nazir Ahmad Ganai Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 123

Showkat Ahmad Bhat Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 124

Wajid Ali Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 125

UT of J&K and others Vs Shabir Ahmad Dar and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 126

Mushtaq Ahmad Dar Vs Enforcement Directorate & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 127

Suraj Chand Vs Bajaj Allianz Insurance Co. Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 128

Swarn Salaria Vs Baldev Raj Sharma & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 129

Atta Mohd Khan Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 130

Farooq Ahmad Parray Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 131

Muneer Ahmad Paswal Vs Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 132

Mehvish Choudhary Vs J&K Bank & Anr 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 133

Suhas Laxman Phadke & anr Suprakash Kundu Deepak Kapoor Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 134

Mohammad Akram Dar & Ors Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 135

Tanveer Ahmed @ Jimmy Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 136

Rasheed Ahmad Peerzada Vs J&K Special Tribunal 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 137

Ashok Kumar Sharma Vs Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 138

United India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs Ashok Kumari and ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 139

M/S Highlander Bar and Restaurant Vs Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 140

M/s Om Infra Ltd. New Delhi Vs Chenab Valley Power Projects P Ltd and ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 141

Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti-Corruption Bureau Vs Hazra Khan 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 142

Bharosi Lal Vs Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 143

Judgments/Orders:

Power To Transfer Undertrial Prisoner From One Jail To Another Only With Court: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Nayeem Rasool Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 102

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the power to direct transfer of an undertrial prisoner from one jail to another vests only with the Magistrate/ Court which had remanded the detenue to a certain prison, and not with the prison authorities.

A bench comprising Justice M A Chowdhary referred to Prison Manual, 2022- For the Superintendence and Management of Prisons in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir read with Prisoners Act, 1900 and observed,

"The power to remand or transfer of an undertrial prisoner from one jail to another is to be exercised by the Court by passing a judicial order, obviously after providing opportunity of being heard and that the change in the place of detention would be permissible only with the permission of the Court under whose warrant the undertrial has been remanded to custody."

Narco-Terrorism Serious Threat To National Security: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Refuses To Interfere With Alleged Drug Trafficker's Detention

Case Title: Mohammad Ashraf Dar vs UT Of J&K.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 103

Observing that the involvement of various terrorist groups and syndicates in drug trafficking leads to threat to the national security and sovereignty of States by way of Narco terrorism, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed the plea of an alleged drug trafficker, detained under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (PITNDPS) Act, 1988.

Orders Framing, Altering Or Refusing To Alter Charges Under NIA Act Are Interlocutory & Not Appealable: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Ayaz Ahmad Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 104

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a Special Court's order framing charge or altering or refusing to alter the charge under the National Investigating Agency Act is an interlocutory order and not appealable under Section 21.

Vaishno Devi Stampede: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Closes PIL To Make Inquiry Report Public, Says Steps Taken By Shrine Board Satisfactory

Case Title: Sheikh Shakeel Ahmed Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 105

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court expressed its satisfaction with the measures taken by the Vaishno Devi Shrine Board to streamline the yatra and ensure safety of pilgrims, following the deadly stampede in the intervening night of 2021-22.

After perusing the record and detailed reply affidavit, Justice Nargal writing for the bench opined that the Shrine Board has taken all measures including short term, medium and long term with a view to streamline the yatra, besides taking all safety measures for the safety of the pilgrims. Not only this, even the Board has undertaken various activities through its Administration and Operations Wing, for better management and facilitation of pilgrims, the bench added.

No Sales Tax On Supply Of Goods For Erecting Transmission Lines, Substations & Power Grids Before 15.05.1997: Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court

Case Title: M/S Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. Versus Assessing Authority Sales Tax Circle D Jammu

Case No.: STR No. 03/2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 106

The Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court held that no sales tax is exigible for the supply of goods for erecting transmission lines, substations, and power grids.

The bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Rajesh Sekhri has observed that the transaction between the assessee and the contractors in which the assessee has supplied the goods and material purchased by it from outside the State against C-Forms for the purpose of erecting transmission lines, sub-stations, and power grids for itself did not amount to “sale” as it was defined under Section 2(L) of the GST Act before 15.05.1997.

Land Acquisition For Ring Road Not Notified As National Highway But Part Of NH Project Must Be Under NHAI Act: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Land Owners of Village Suthsoo and others Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 107

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ordered that all land required for the construction of the Srinagar Ring Road must be acquired in accordance with the National Highways Act, 1956. The court also ruled that additional compensation of 20% must be paid to those whose land has been acquired for the project.

The court observed that the Srinagar Ring Road Project is a national highway project and needs to be treated as part of existing National Highway 1A. It is not necessary to declare it a national highway under Section 2 of the NH Act, 1956 until it is completed, however, the Central Government is obliged in law, in terms of Section 3A, to initiate the process of acquisition under the NH Act, 1956, it held.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Quashes Imam's Detention Under PSA, Raps Detaining Authority For Acting On Vague Grounds

Case Title: Molvi Mohammad Amin Pala Vs UT of J&K.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 108

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed the detention order of an Imam, accused of delivering speeches to mobilize common masses against the sovereignty and integrity of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir.

Justice M A Chowdhary observed that the grounds of detention are vague and stale, lacking any specific instances or incidents to justify the detainee's preventive detention.

Safe Custody Of Alleged Contraband And Swift Forensic Analysis Essential: Jammu & Kashmir High Court On Prosecution's Obligations In NDPS Case

Case Title: UT of J&K Vs Pradeep Singh( Now Dead)

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 109

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized on the prosecution's obligation under Section 55 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act to prove that the contraband after its recovery and seizure from the accused was kept in safe custody and that the sample of the contraband was forwarded to Forensic Science Laboratory without any delay.

Order XIV Rule 5 CPC | Court Cannot Frame Issues Beyond Pleadings: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Farooq Ahmad Mir Vs Nisar Ahmad Wani and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 110

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that scope of the power granted to courts under Order XIV Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code to amend, add, delete, or strike out issues is not absolute and is subject to the provisions of Rule 3 of Order XIV, which limits the framing of issues to materials comprising allegations made in pleadings, answers to interrogatories, documents produced, or statements made on oath.

A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed,

"The power enshrined in Order 14, Rule 5, however, is controlled by the provisions of Rule 3 of Order 14 which provides that the court may frame issues from all or any of the materials comprising allegations made in the pleadings or in answers to interrogatories, documents produced by the parties, allegations made on oath by the parties or by any person present on their behalf, or statements made by the pleaders appearing for the parties, upon examination of witnesses or inspection of the documents".

Question Paper Leakage In Govt Exams Shakes Public Confidence: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Refuses Bail To Accused Officer, Son In SI Recruitment Scam

Case Title: Ashok Kumar Vs CBI

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 111

Observing that a recruitment scam in government services undermines public confidence in the system and causes grave injustice to deserving and meritorious candidates, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court rejected the bail application of a police officer and his son who were arrested by the CBI last year in connection with the infamous JKSSB Police Sub-Inspector Recruitment Scam.

"The offence is against the society as whole as due to the said huge scam carrier of hundred and thousands of candidates/aspirants for the post of Sub Inspector has been ruined/marred. Question paper leakage damages the future of our young generation and this criminal act cannot be compared with scams involving million of rupees, as the said crime is against the society at large", the bench underscored.

Preliminary Inquiry Necessary When There Is Abnormal Delay By Complainant In Initiating Criminal Prosecution: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Reiterates

Case Title: Harbachan Singh Vs Sr. Superintendent of Police Srinagar and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 112

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that when there is abnormal delay by complainant in initiating criminal prosecution, it becomes necessary for the Magistrate to order a preliminary inquiry.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed this inquiry can help identify any potential obstacles in the prosecution process and determine the reasons for the delay, such as missing evidence or witnesses.

Public Safety Act | Preventive Detention Not An Arrest, No 24-Hour Magistrate Appearance Required: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Muntazir Ahmad Bhat Vs UT of J&K.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 113

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that being detained under the Public Safety Act cannot be considered an arrest for committing an offence under the penal law. Instead, it is a preventive measure to avoid any possible harmful act from the detained person based on their background and therefore, there is no requirement to produce the detainee before a magistrate within 24 hours, it clarified.

Banks Can Exclude Such Borrowers From OTS Scheme From Whom Chances Of Recovery Are High: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Ghulam Ahmad Mir Vs J&K Bank & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 114

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a banking company enjoys the discretion to formulate policies and exclude from its One Time Settlement Scheme such borrowers, who have a higher chance of recovery.

A bench comprising Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

"A banking company is free to make policies and issue guidelines so as to differentiate the cases of those borrowers where the chances of recovery are bright from those where the chances of recovery are bleak. Merely because a banking company has formulated a scheme excluding the cases of borrowers where the chances of recovery are bright, it cannot be stated that such a scheme or such covenants of the scheme are discriminatory in nature against the excluded borrowers."

BSF Personnel Can't Be Terminated Without Opportunity Of Hearing Even If Court Of Enquiry Concludes Trial Is Inexpedient: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Hem Raj Vs Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (115)

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that under Rule 22 of the BSF Rules 1969, it is mandatory to inform the accused of all adverse reports against them and provide them with an opportunity to defend themselves in writing, even if a Court of Enquiry has concluded that trial of such person is inexpedient.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed,

"Even if it is assumed that the respondents could proceed against the petitioner under Rule 22 supra while opining that it is inexpedient or impracticable to subject the petitioner to the trial for having overstayed leave, yet in terms of sub-Rule (2) of the Rules 22 supra, the respondents were mandatorily required to inform the petitioner together with all reports adverse to him besides providing an opportunity to him to submit in writing his explanation and defence."

J&K Police Manual Allows Discharge Of Probationer Without Assigning Reasons But No Stigmatic Citations Without Enquiry: High Court

Case Title: Shamim Ahmed Vs UT of J&K & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 116

Clarifying the legal provisions for the discharge of a probationer under the Jammu & Kashmir Police Manual, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an individual can be discharged without specifying the reasons behind the decision, however, if the discharge order cites deficiencies in the service of the incumbent, it could be deemed stigmatic and may not hold up in legal proceedings.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Motor Accident Tribunal To Decide Claim Filed By Dependants Of Judge Shot Dead By Militants In 2001

Case Title: Seema Phull and another Naina Sodi and others Vs United India Insurance Company and another

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 117

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court directed a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to decide the petition moved by the dependants of a Judge, who was shot dead in his car by militants, while travelling to his hometown.

At the outset, Justice Sanjay Dhar observed that even when the vehicle is immobile, it cannot be stated the motor vehicle was not in use and an accident which arises at a time when the vehicle is not mobile, can well be termed as an "accident arising out of use of motor vehicle".

[Land Acquisition] Reference To Market Value Of Small Plots Not Always Reliable, But May Be Referred In Absence Of Other Material: Jammu & Kashmir HC

Case Title: Union Of India Vs Madan Lal & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 118

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that in determining the market value of a large piece of land proposed for acquisition, it may not be safe to rely solely on the rate at which small parcels of land adjacent to it are sold.

However, the court reiterated that this cannot be an absolute rule as in cases where there is no other material available, the court may compare prices paid for small plots of land to arrive at a fair market value and this approach should not be dismissed outright.

Allotment Under Evacuees’ Property Act Confers Only Temporary Right Of Use, Not Title Or Interest: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Bachan Lal. Vs J&K Special Tribunal

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 119

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that allotment under the Evacuees’ Property Act is a temporary right of use and occupation of any immovable property and it neither confers any right nor title or interest over the allottee.

A single bench of Justice Rajesh Sekhri while referring to a full Bench judgment in Shamsher Singh v. Dy. Custodian 1973 General reiterated,

"Allotment is a mere license, which is revocable by the concerned authorities under certain conditions. It neither confers ownership nor interest in the land. The interest of an allottee arises only by statutory grant to displaced persons, which is not amenable to acquisition or alienation in any normal modes by way of sale, gift, mortgage or will".

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Rejects CRPF Constable's Plea Against Termination Citing Inordinate Delay, Questions His Suitability For Disciplined Force

Case Title: Nissar Ahmad Shah Vs Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 120

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the termination of a CRPF Constable stating that his inability to justify the six-year delay in challenging his termination order raises concerns about his efficiency to serve in a disciplined force.

A single bench of Justice Moksha Kazmi Khajuria observed,

"The petitioner was supposed to challenge the termination order of 2001 at least after the same was provided to him by this court; the petitioner slept over the matter, remained in deep slumber’s for about six years and filed this petition on the basis of the documents without any number, date or receipt...The doctrine of delay and latches is not to be taken so lightly when the petitioner has miserably failed to explain as to why he could not approach this Court after the termination order was furnished to him."

Court Not Having Territorial Jurisdiction Cannot Hear Application For Amendment Of Plaint To Acquire Jurisdiction: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Abdul Aziz Bhat & Ors Vs Hilal Ahmad Bhat.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 121

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that when the court lacks territorial jurisdiction, it cannot entertain an application for amendment of a plaint, which amendment would vest territorial jurisdiction in the court.

A single bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed,

"The courts have to examine the plaint as existing and come to the conclusion whether it discloses the court to be having territorial jurisdiction or not; if the averments contained in the plaint as existing does not disclose the court to be having territorial jurisdiction and amendment is sought to vest territorial jurisdiction in the court , then the only option for the court is to return the plaint and the court will have no jurisdiction to even consider the application for amendment of the plaint".

Drivers With Heavy Goods Vehicle Licenses Can Also Drive Passenger Carrying Vehicles: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: National India Insurance Vs Jagjeet Singh

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 122

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that individuals possessing a driving license for a specific type of commercial vehicle are deemed qualified to drive any other type of commercial vehicle as well.

A single bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

"Any person who was holding a driving license authorizes him to drive a particular type of commercial vehicle would automatically be eligible to drive any other type of commercial vehicle, meaning thereby that a driver holding a driving license to drive a heavy goods vehicle would be competent to drive a passenger carrying vehicle,".

Mere Protraction Of Trial Or Delay In Hearing Of Appeal By Itself Not Ground To Reduce Sentence: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Nazir Ahmad Ganai Vs State of J&K.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 123

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has observed mere protraction of trial or delay in deciding the appeal cannot be considered as a valid reason for reducing the sentence, especially when the appellant has been granted interim bail during the appeal process.

Grounds In Detention Order Quashed By Writ Court Can't Be Considered While Passing Fresh Detention Order: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Showkat Ahmad Bhat Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 124

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High ruled that when a Court quashes a detention order using a high prerogative writ, the grounds of the previous order should not be considered, either in whole or in part, when determining new grounds for detention. This is because when the Court strikes down an earlier order with a writ, it renders the entire order null and void, it clarified.

J&K Civil Service Regulation | Suspension Period Of Fully Exonerated Govt Servant Has To Be Treated As Time 'On Duty': Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Wajid Ali Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 125

Clarifying the mandate of Article 108-B of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service Regulation, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed when a Government servant is completely cleared of any wrongdoing, they are entitled to receive full pay and allowances as if they had never been dismissed, removed, compulsorily retired, or suspended. In such cases, the period of absence from duty is treated as time spent on duty, the court held.

Summary Suit | Invoices/ Bills Are “Written Contracts” Within Order 37 CPC: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: UT of J&K and others Vs Shabir Ahmad Dar and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 126

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that invoices/bills amount to “written contracts” within the contemplation of Order 37 of the CPC to initiate a summary suit.

FEMA | No Natural Justice Violation If Adjudicating Authority Unable To Furnish Few Documents Relied Upon To Initiate Action: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Mushtaq Ahmad Dar Vs Enforcement Directorate & Ors

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 127

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized that withholding documents from the aggrieved party does not violate natural justice principles if the opposing party is unable to provide them.

[Motor Accident] 'Substantial Rights' Involved Not Ground To Condone Unexplained Delay: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Suraj Chand Vs Bajaj Allianz Insurance Co. Ltd.

Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 128

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court stressed that timely filing of appeals under the Motor Vehicles Act is crucial and should not be overlooked, even if the applicant believes their substantial rights are at stake.

The bench reiterated that the purpose of filing an appeal in such cases is to ensure a swift resolution, fair compensation, and discourage casual and negligent behaviour from opposing parties.

"The ground urged in the application that the delay in filing the appeal is required to be condoned as the applicant has substantial right involved in the matter cannot be accepted in view of the fact that in filing of an appeal under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act against an award in law is aimed at or providing a cheap and speedy remedy and justice by way of compensation to a claimant."

Ex-Parte Decree | Remedies Under Order 9 Rule 13 & Section 96 CPC Are Concurrent, Can Be Resorted To Simultaneously: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Swarn Salaria Vs Baldev Raj Sharma & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 129

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that remedies under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC and Section 96 of the CPC, which allow for setting aside an ex parte judgment and filing an appeal, respectively, are concurrent and can be resorted to simultaneously.

Article 22(5) | Everyday Delay By Detaining Authority In Dealing With Detenu's Representation Has To Be Explained: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Atta Mohd Khan Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 130

While quashing a preventive detention order under J&K Public Safety Act, the Jammu & Kashmir High Court ruled that the Constitution casts legal obligation on the Government to consider the detenu's representation as early as possible.

Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

"Everyday delay in dealing with the representation has to be explained and the explanation offered must indicate that there was no slackness or indifference. Any unexplained delay would be breach of constitutional imperative and it would render the continued detention of the detenu as illegal."

Every Member Of Police Force Required To Have Exceptional Integrity: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Upholds Constable's Termination For Fraud

Case Title: Farooq Ahmad Parray Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 131

Observing that every member of the police force is required to have exceptional integrity, the Jammu & Kashmir High Court upheld the termination of a Constable during probation period for submitting fake documents to secure additional points during the selection process.

Resorted To "Parallel Banking": Jammu & Kashmir High Upholds Peon's Dismissal For Misappropriation Of Funds

Case Title: Muneer Ahmad Paswal Vs Union of India.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 132

Observing that every bank employee is under solemn duty to protect the interest of the bank and to discharge his duties with utmost integrity, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the dismissal of a peon from the Ellaquai Dehati Bank.

A bench comprising Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed,

"The petitioner has betrayed the trust and confidence of the bank by resorting to a parallel banking by receipt of deposit from customers against fake receipts and repay such deposits against withdrawals/cheques without routing the deposits and payment to the bank and made requisite entries falsely in the passbooks of the customers and this charge against the petitioner stood proved by way of a detailed inquiry."

No Revision Against Rejection Of Plaint Under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Mehvish Choudhary Vs J&K Bank & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 133

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the provision of Revision under Section 115 CPC cannot be used to challenge an order of Rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11. This is because an order passed under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC is considered to be a decree by legal interpretation, making it appealable under Section 96 read with Order 41 of the CPC, it clarified.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In Asha Kit Scam, Says Can't Stifle Genuine Prosecution

Case Title: Suhas Laxman Phadke & anr Suprakash Kundu Deepak Kapoor Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 134

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court refused to quash the FIR registered by Vigilance Organization (Now ACB) in Asha Kit Scam, observing that the allegations in the FIR clearly disclose commission of cognizable offence and therefore, it would not be open to the Court to stifle a genuine prosecution.

The case related to purchase of medicines at exorbitant rates by the Director Health Services, Jammu from companies that had been permanently de-registered or blacklisted.

Every Water Source Is Government Property: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Mohammad Akram Dar & Ors Vs State of J&K.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 135

Observing that every water source in the State is and shall remain the property of the Government, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a plea filed by the residents of the village Qasba Yar, District Shopian, seeking directions upon the administration to not to change, divert or take any water from Yari Kohal, a river flowing through their village.

Underscoring the goal of the State in ensuring that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are distributed to subserve the common good as mandated under Article 39 of the Constitution, the Court said that the respondents have undertaken the exercise to ensure fair distribution of the natural resources and no individual or group of individuals can claim any right to exclusive use of natural resources.

Detaining Authority Should Communicate To Detenue Time Limit In Which He Can Make Representation Against Detention: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Tanveer Ahmed @ Jimmy Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 136

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court said that a detaining authority should communicate to the detenue, in the grounds of detention, the time limit in which he can make a representation to it i.e., till the approval of the detention order by the State Government.

Justice M A Chowdhary reasoned that the detenue’s right to make a representation to the detaining authority is only available to him till approval of detention order by the Government and therefore the detaining authority should clearly communicate it to the detenu.

J&K Special Tribunal Can Refer Matters To High Court For Initiating Proceedings Under Contempt Of Courts Act: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Rasheed Ahmad Peerzada Vs J&K Special Tribunal.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 137

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that J&K Special Tribunal is deemed to be a "court" subordinate to the High Court for the purposes of Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act and, therefore, shall be well within its powers to refer an appropriate case to the High Court for initiating appropriate proceedings against the violators of its orders or against those who commit its criminal contempt.

A bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar remarked,

“…The J&K Special Tribunal is not a toothless body altogether and is possessed of sufficient powers to deal with the citizens who dare to commit its contempt. Though it is ideal as also to make the functioning of the Tribunal effective to make an amendment in the Act of 1988 to confer upon it specifically the power to punish for contempt in relation to itself or any member thereof, as has been done in various statutes”.

All ACR Entries Of Public Servant Must Be Communicated To Him With Reasonable Opportunity To Make Representation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Ashok Kumar Sharma Vs Union of India.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 138

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that all entries in Annual Confidential Reports (ACR) of an employee, including adverse entries, should be communicated to him with reasonable opportunity to make a representation against it.

Motor Accident Tribunal Possesses All Trappings Of Court Though Not Bound By Stringent Procedures Of CPC & Evidence Act: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: United India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs Ashok Kumari and ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 139

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that a Tribunal constituted under the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 with its ability to summon and examine witnesses, cross-examine them, and order the disclosure of documents, possesses all the trappings of a court though not bound by the stringent procedures outlined in the Civil Procedure Code and Evidence Act.

Cantonment Board Cannot Levy Bar License Fee Based On Restaurant's Annual Revenue: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: M/S Highlander Bar and Restaurant Vs Union of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 140

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a Cantonment board cannot levy trade license fee from a restaurant operating within its jurisdiction based on the restaurant's annual revenue. A bench comprising Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi observed,

"Claim of the respondents (Cantonment Board) of fixing the licence fee proportionate to the revenue earned by the petitioner (Restaurant) and on the basis of the fee in terms of notification, SO275 of the excise department, cannot be taken into account because of the fact that firstly, the respondents have no access to the revenue earned by the petitioner and secondly the licence fee charged by the respondents is with respect to the sanitation, hygiene and a licence to run the business etc., in the Cantonment Area of the respondents.

Kwar Hydroelectric Project | Minimal Judicial Interference In Contractual Matters Especially If Public Exchequer At Stake: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: M/s Om Infra Ltd. New Delhi Vs Chenab Valley Power Projects P Ltd and ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 141

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that judicial interference in the matters concerning contractual matters must be minimal especially in case where there is propensity of negative impact on the public exchequer.

A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal has observed,

"...Courts should not use a magnifying glass while scanning the tenders and make every small mistake appear like a big blunder. In fact, the courts must give “fair play in the joints” to the government and public sector undertakings in matters of contract. Courts must also not interfere where such interference will cause unnecessary loss to the public exchequer".

Trial Court Can't Discharge Accused By Conducting "Mini Trial" At Stage Of Framing Charges: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti-Corruption Bureau Vs Hazra Khan

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 142

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that at the stage of framing charge against an accused, the Court can neither examine the material brought on record in detail nor examine the sufficiency of the material to establish the offence against the accused.

ITBP Force Rules | Army Court Not Recording Plea Of Guilt In Words Used By Accused Vitiates Proceedings: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Bharosi Lal Vs Union of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 143

Quashing a Summary Force Court (SFC) proceedings against a Constable of ITBP, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court said that since Army Rules are mandatory in nature, it is imperative that Army Court shall record the plea of guilt in the words used by the accused or as nearly as possible in the words used by the accused, as a violation of this mandatory requirement will vitiate the trial, conviction and penalty.