J&K&L High Court Weekly Roundup: November 14 To November 20, 2022

• Abdul Rashid Dar & Anr Vs Reyaz Ahmad Kucha y2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 211

• Azra & ors Vs Mohammad Afzal Baghat 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 212
• Sheikh Feroz Ahmad Vs UT of J&K 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 214

• Hotel Corporation of India Ltd Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 215

• UT of J&K & Ors V/s All J&K Workers Union SRTC and another J&K Road Transport Employees Association & Anr 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 216
•  Sanjay Raina Vs State of J&K & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 218

•  Shah Fahad Peerzada and another vs UT of JK and others 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 219

Judgements/Orders :

• If Any Part Of Amount Claimed Is Admitted, Leave To Defend In Summary Suit Can't Be Granted Unless Admitted Amount Is Deposited: J&K&L High Court

Case Title : Abdul Rashid Dar & Anr Vs Reyaz Ahmad Kuchay

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 211

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that if any part of the amount claimed by the plaintiff is admitted by the defendant to be due from him, leave to defend a summary suit under Order 37 CPC cannot be granted unless the amount so admitted to be due is deposited by the defendant in the court

• Witness Appearing For Complainant And Cross-Examined By Accused Cannot Be Called To Appear As Defence Witness: J&K&L High Court

Case Title : Azra & ors Vs Mohammad Afzal Baghat

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 212

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the witnesses examined by one party cannot be allowed to be examined on behalf of the opposite party at its instance under Section 540 J&K CrPC (akin to sec 311 of central CrPC).

Justice M A Chowdhary observed,

"The question to be decided by the learned trial Magistrate was as to whether the witnesses examined by the complainants can be asked to appear as witnesses for the defence. Even if the learned Magistrate was of the view that certain clarifications were required to be made by these witnesses while being cross examined and re-examined during trial, it could not be legally tenable to call these witnesses on behalf of the opposite party. At the most these witnesses could have been summoned as complainants' witnesses for their further cross examination, if same was required."

• S.482 CrPC| Mere Incorporation Of S.307 IPC In FIR/Chargesheet Not Ground To Reject Compromise, Nature Of Injury Relevant Factor: J&K&L High Court

Case Title : Sheikh Feroz Ahmad Vs UT of J&K

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 214

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that merely because an FIR/charge-sheet incorporates the provision of Section 307 IPC, it would not by itself be a ground to reject the petition under Section 482 of the Code and refuse to accept the settlement between the parties.

Justice M A Chowdhary observed that while taking a call as to whether compromise in such cases should be effected or not the Court should go by the nature of injury sustained, the portion of the bodies where the injuries were inflicted (namely whether injuries are caused at the vital/delicate parts of the body) and the nature of weapons used etc. On that basis, if it is found that there is a strong possibility of proving the charge under Section 307 IPC, once the evidence to that effect is led and injuries proved, the Court should not accept settlement between the parties, the bench underscored.

• Disputes Between Two Limbs Of Govt Should Not Be Fought In Court At The Expense Of Public Exchequer: J&K&L High Court

Case Title : Hotel Corporation of India Ltd Vs UT of J&K & Ors.

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 215

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that disputes between the two limbs of Government of India should not be brought to the Court, to be fought for years at the expense of public exchequer.

"It would be desirable to relegate the parties to the Administrative Dispute Resolution Mechanism provided under the Office Memo" , the court observed.

• J&K Road Transport Corporation Employees Not Entitled To Pensionary Benefits: High Court

Case Title : UT of J&K & Ors V/s All J&K Workers Union SRTC and another J&K Road Transport Employees Association & Anr.

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 216

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court declined pensionary benefits to the retired employees of J&K State Road Transport Corporation (JKSRTC) while holding that the employees appointed by the Corporation were not entitled to the same at par with the government employees.

• Birth Record As Per School Certificate Enjoys Priority Over Village Records While Determining Claims For Juvenility: J&K&L High Court

Case Title : Sanjay Raina Vs State of J&K & Ors.

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 218

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that in order to ascertain the claims of juvenility, courts should give priority to the certificate issued by the educational institution other than play school which was firstly attended by the accused.

The observations came from a bench comprising Justices M A Chowdhary while hearing a revision petition against order of Additional Sessions Judge which upheld Magistrate's decision that the petitioner/appellant was not a juvenile.

• J&K&L High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against Kashmir Walla Editors

Case Title: Shah Fahad Peerzada and another vs UT of JK and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 219

Dismissing a petition filed by the editors of a Valley-based news portal The Kashmir Walla for quashing of an FIR registered against them last year, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court said the case requires an investigation to find out whether the offences have been committed or not.

Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul in the judgment pronounced on November 17 said:

"Since the allegations contained in the complaint on the basis of which the FIR in question has been registered allege commission of offences punishable under Section 153, 505 IPC, which requires to be investigated by the police and during the investigation, the defence which may be available to the petitioners can be taken and after the investigation is concluded, the police has to find out whether or not offences for which the FIR has been registered are made out or not."