LiveLaw Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Half-Yearly Digest: January - June 2026
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Half-Yearly Digest January - June 2026Citations 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) [ 1 - 286 ]Nominal Index:Saleema & Ors Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 1STATE OF J & K vs NAZIR AHMAD BHAT AND OTHERS 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 2State of Jammu and Kashmir vs Ahsan-ul-Haq Khan 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 3Lt. Col. Daljit Singh Dogra vs State of J&K 2026 LiveLaw...
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Half-Yearly Digest January - June 2026
Citations 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) [ 1 - 286 ]
Nominal Index:
Saleema & Ors Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 1
STATE OF J & K vs NAZIR AHMAD BHAT AND OTHERS 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 2
State of Jammu and Kashmir vs Ahsan-ul-Haq Khan 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 3
Lt. Col. Daljit Singh Dogra vs State of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 4
Bharat Oil Traders Vs Assistant Commissioner & anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 5
Rishi Kumar vs Chenab Valley Power Projects Ltd 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 6
Sushma Devi vs State of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 7
UT Of J&K Vs Bilal Ahmad Wani 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 8
Ghulam Rasool Bhat Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 9
Nazir Ahmad Bhat Vs Chairman/ Managing Director J&K Bank Corporate Office 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 10
State Of J&K Vs Ahsan-ul-Haq 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 11
Sarwa Zahoor Vs Deputy Director Enforcement Directorate & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 12
Mehbooba Mufti vs Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 13
M/S Ace Enterprises Vs Shri Jagdeep Rana 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 14
Shafiq Anjum vs State of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 15
Abdul Hamid Wani Vs Abdul Hamid Lone 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 16
Farooq Ahmad Dar Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 17
Nisar Ahmad Kakapori and Anr vs Aijaz Ahmad Kadoo& Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 18
YASIR AMIN KHANDAY AND ANOTHER Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 19
Abdul Hamid Wani Vs Abdul Hamid Lone 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 20
Dinesh Singh Chib & Ors Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 21
Ishant Sharma v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors LiveLaw 2026 (JKL) 22
Shrisht Pal Sharma v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 23
Jasveer Singh and others vs Jugal Kishore 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 24
MOHAMMAD SHAIF BHAT ALIAS WANI & ANR Vs. RAFI AHMAD BHAT ALIAS WANI AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 25
Arfaz Mehboob Tak v. Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 26
Mst Khati Vs Abdul Rashid Salroo 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 27
National Insurance Company Limited Vs Bashir & Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 28
M/S ARISTO LABORATORIES PVT. LTD Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 29
Iqbal Singh Vs Durga Devi & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 30
Gh. Rasool Ganie Vs State of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 31
Om Prakash & Ors. vs Bodh Raj & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 32
Mohd. Ashraf Dar vs UT of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 33
Malika Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 34
UT Of J&K Vs Gulzar Ahmad Khan 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 35
New Convent High School Vs Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 36
Huzaif Ahmad Dar Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 37
Mushtaq Ahmad Bakshi 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 38
State Of J&K Vs Dhanwanter Singh and ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 39
State of J&K V/s Dhanwanter Singh and ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 40
Union of India vs Rajammal 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 41
Malika vs UT of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 42
Mazeed Ali vs UT of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 43
Sikander Sharma Vs Addl Commissioner Jammu and Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 44
State Of J&K Vs Daleep Singh 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 46
Sapna Devi Vs Sheetal 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 47
Abdul Rashid Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 48
Priyanka Rakwal Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 49
M/s Krishna Engineering Works Industrial Estate 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 50
Himani Sharma Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 51
Shareen Gani v. UT of J&K & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 52
Younis Ali Vs Union Of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 53
Dr. Posh Charak and others Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 54
M/s Ram Kour Behari Lal and Co Vs M/s Hakam Chand and Co. and others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 55
Deepak Bawa Sharma Vs Asif Iqbal 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 56
Union Of India Vs M/S Tarmat Limited 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 57
Shabnam Akhter Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 58
Mehraj Ud Din Malik Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 59
Sabza Begum Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 60
Noor Illahi Faktoo Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 61
Mazeed Ali Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 62
Joginder Singh & Anr Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 63
Altaf Hussain & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 64
Mumtaz Ahmad Vs Collector Land Acquisition Rajouri 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 65
Shabnam Akhter vs UT of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 66
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Prem Gupta & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 67
Himmat Kumar Raina v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 68
Mohd Mansha & Ors Vs Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 69
Ch. Mohd. Sadiq Vs Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 70
Altaf Hussain & Anr Vs Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 71
Murad Ali & Ors Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 72
Chuni Lal Vs J&K Bank 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 73
Changa Ram Va State of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 74
Satish Sasan & Ors. v. State of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 75
Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology, Jammu Vs Dr Ankur Sharma & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 76
Muzzafar Farooq Mir Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 77
Abdul Salam Dar v. High Court of J&K and others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 78
Shabir Ahmad Dar Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 79
Noushad Ahmad Vs Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 80
Anoop Uppal Vs Jammu Municipal Corporation 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 81
State Of J&K Vs Javaid Ahmad Ganai 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 82
Mahavir Singh @ Appu v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 83
Akhand Prakash Shahi vs. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 84
Sham Lal v. State of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 85
Tirath Singh Vs State of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 86
Gopal Dass vs Surinder Kumar 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 87
Sarita Devi Vs Mohan Singh 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 88
UT of J&K Vs Maqbool Sheikh & connected matters 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 89
Mohd. Ashraf Dar & Ors. v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 90
Mohammad Yaseen & Anr Vs State2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 91
Omesh Singh & Ors. v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 92
Ghulam Mohammad Rah Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 93
Gurjit Singh Vs. Narcotics Control Bureau, Jammu Zone 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 94
Shokat Ali v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 95
State of J&K & Ors v. Irshad Ahmad Sheikh & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 96
Bansi Lal & Ors. v. State of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 97
Mudasir Ahmad Bhat Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 98
Sanjay Gupta & Anr Vs Prem Kumar 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 99
Sudhir Kumar Vs Peerzada Tasaduq Hussain (Drug Inspector) 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 100
Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Romesh Chander & Ors. and Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Pritam Singh & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 101
Mohammad Yaqoob Beigh Vs Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 102
Mohd. Umar Nizami Vs Collector Land Acquisition (ACR), Ramban & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 103
Subash Raina v. State of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 104
Raghbir Singh v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 105
Kamal @ Kaka v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 106
Rehmatullah Naik v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 107
ROBKAR vs SANJEEV VERMA, COMMISSIONER/ SECRETARY, GAD, JAMMU 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 108
UT of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors Vs Dr. Jyoti Gupta & Ors (Connected Matters) 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 109
Kripal Singh Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 110
Kripal Singh Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 110
Asif Amin Thoker Th. His Sister Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 111
Chuni Lal Vs Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 112
Mushtaq Ahmad Ganie Vs Union Territory of J&K & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 113
Gaganpreet Singh Wazir Vs Food Corporation of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 114
Ajaz Ahmed Vs UT of J&K through SHO Police Station Poonch & Superintendent, District Jail, Poonch 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 115
Javid Ahmad Zargar Vs Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 116
Arjun Kumar Sharma Vs State of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 117
Mumtaz Ahmed v. UT of J&K and others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 118
Sajjad Ahmed vs Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 119
Anjum Mehmood Vs Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 120
Sehran Bashir Nadaf v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 121
Rubeena Begum Vs Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 122
Babu Ram & Ors. Vs Kewal Krishan 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 123
Divisional Manager, J&K State Forest Corporation v. Satish Kumar 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 124
Fatima Bano v. State of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 125
Amit Kumar v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 126
Petitioner Vs Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 127
Ghulam Nabi Bhat & Ors. v. State of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 128
Atiqa Begum and Ors. Vs UT of J&K and Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 129
Kali Dass & Anr. v. State of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 130
Petitioners v. Union Territory Through Police Station Ram Munshi Bagh & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 131
Santosha Devi v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 132
Bhopinder Singh v. State of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 133
Santosha Devi v. UT of J&K & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 134
Gopal Krishan v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 135
Syed Lutfullah Shah & Anr. v. A.W. Kirpak Supdt. Engineer & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 136
Subash Chander Sharma v. SHO P/S Anti Corruption Bureau Jammu & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 137
Ishfaq Ahmad Wani Vs Chairman Legislative Council & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 138
Amit Kumar Bansal & Ors. Vs Sanjeev Kumar Gupta & connected matters 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 139
Amin Allaie Vs National Investigation Agency 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 140
Subash Chander Sharma Vs SHO P/S Anti Corruption Bureau Jammu & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 141
Ajaz Ahmed v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 142
Rajeshwar Singh Vs State & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 143
Naresh Kumar & Others v. J&K Special Tribunal 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 144
Union Territory of J&K Vs Piaray Lal Tickoo 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 145
Rubina v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 146
Khalid Latif Butt Th. Abdul Latif Butt Vs UT Of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 147
Amin Allaie Vs National Investigating Agency, Jammu 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 148
Union Territory of J&K v. Piaray Lal Tickoo 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 149
Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement v. Yatin Yadav & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 150
Abdul Aziz Bhat & Ors. v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 151
Jasmeet Singh & Anr. v. Shafi Ahmed 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 152
Afroz Ahmed Sheikh v. Narcotics Control Bureau Jammu Zone 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 153
UT of J&K & Ors. v. Raghu Singh Jandla 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 154
Mela Ram & Ors. Vs State of J&K & Anr. Arti Devi Vs State of J&K & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 155
Feroz Ahmad Dar v. M/s Himalayan Motors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 156
M/s Sports Goods Industry v. State of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 157
Pushpa Devi & Ors. v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 158
Manga Ram v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 159
Maqsad Ali Kohli v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 160
Harsh Dev Singh Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 161
Nargees Javaid v. Ghulam Jeelani Nengroo 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 162
Smanla Dorje Nurboo v. Union Territory of Ladakh a/w Deldan Namgail v. Union Territory of Ladakh 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 163
Ghulam Nabi Bhat & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 164
UT of J&K v. Sameer Ahmad Bhat & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 165
Ghulam Mohammad Sheikh & Ors. Vs Gulzar Ahmad Sheikh & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 166
Sanjay Kumar & Anr. Vs Mohan Singh & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 167
Ahsan ul Haq Khanday Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 168
UT of J&K v. Sameer Ahmad Khan & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 169
UT of J&K & Ors. Vs Sara Begum 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 170
Deepak Singh & Ors Vs UT of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 171
Aqib Ahmad Vs UT of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 172
Mehraj Din Malik (through father Shamas Din) v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 173
Mohd. Kabir v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 174
Altaf Ahmad Waza v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 175
Yawar Ahmad Bhagat v. UT of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 176
Riyaz Ahmad Wani Vs Abdul Hamid Dar 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 177
Inhabitants of Village Pariswani Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 178
State Bank of India Vs Smt. Balbir Kaur 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 179
XXX v. Afaq Ali Khan 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 180
Abdul Ahad Dar v. Mohammad Sidiq Dar 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 181
Bashir Ahmad Bhat Vs UT of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 182
Nazir Ahmad Mir & Ors Vs Ishfaq Ahmad Mir 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 183
Union Territory of J&K & Ors. Vs Ravinder Kanta & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 184
M. Naseer U Zaman Vs Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh Financial Corporation & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 185
Inhabitants of Block Harwan v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 186
Abdul Rashid Kohli v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 187
Aijaz Hussain Sahaf v. State of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 188
Tabassum Qadir Parray & Ors. v. High Court of Jammu and Kashmir & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 189
Farooq Ahmad v. Habib Ul-Ilah Bhat & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 190
Ali Mohd. Dar v. State of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 191
Chairman J&K Board of School Education v. Syed Abdul Rouf & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 192
Burhan Ahmad Mattoo v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 193
Radha Krishen Koul & Anr. v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 194
Vilayat Aziz Mir v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 195
Mohammad Ashraf Sheikh Vs Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 196
Darshan Singh @ Deepu v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 197
Manish Kumar Bharti v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 198
Aultaf Ahmad Shah v. J&K Bank Ltd. & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 199
Rouf Ahmad Mir & Ors Vs Adfara Rahman 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 200
Basharat Ahmad Abbasi Alias Bashir And Another v. UT of J&K And Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 201
Jahangir Ahmad Parray v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 202
Mohammad Amin Rather And Others v. UT of J&K And Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 203
Shagun Chandel (wife of detenu Nisar Ahmad) v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 204
Syed Irfan Ahmad v. NIA Jammu 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 205
Mushtaq Ahmad Malik v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 206
Hajira v. J&K Special Tribunal & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 207
Pushap Kumar Tickoo & Ors. v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 208
Dr. Abdul Majeed Bhat v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 209
Tanveer Ahmad Mir v. Union Territory of J&K and Another 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 210
Rajinder Singh v. Home Secretary to Govt. of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 211
Tanveer Ahmad Mir v. UT of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 212
Vishvendra Singh v. UT of J&K & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 213
Mohammad Yousuf Allie v. High Court of J&K and Ladakh & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 214
Mohammad Latief Dar v. UT of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 215
Rayees Ahmad Lone v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 216
Nazira Begum v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 217
Majid Yaqub Dar v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 218
Rakesh Kumar v. UT of J&K and Another 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 219
Minor Victim “X” Through Her Father v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 220
Imtiyaz Qadir Bhat & Anr. v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 221
Pir Mohd Ishaq & Ors. v. University of Kashmir & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 222
Reham Ali v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 223
S.D. Mevada & Anr. v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir through Food Safety Officer, Block Shopian 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 224
UT of J&K & Ors. v. Khalid Jehangir Bhat & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 225
G.M. Sheikh v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 226
Shafat Ahmad (through father) v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 227
Arif Billa Sheikh v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 228
Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. & Ors. v. Naseer Ahmad Sheikh 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 229
Bashir Ahmad Akhoon & Anr. v. Ghulam Ahmad Malik 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 230
Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. & Ors. v. Tanu Gupta & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 231
Pawan Kumar @Raja v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 232
Sohan Singh & Ors. v. Chuni Lal 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 233
Rameez Ahmed v. Union of India through Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau, Jammu 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 234
Bisma Bashir v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 235
Umar Nazir Bhat v. UT of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 236
State of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors. v. Ghulam Mohd. Tantray 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 237
Bittu Ram v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 238
Riyaz Ahmad Hajam & Anr. v. Union Territory through SHO Police Station Uri District Baramulla 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 239
State of J&K Through Senior Superintendent of Police, Kathua v. Balwinder Kumar Alias Bittu 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 240
Union Territory of J&K & Ors. v. Fayaz Ahmad Bhat & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 241
Ali Mohammad Dar v. Union Territory of J&K & Anr. connected with Muzamilla v. State (UT of J&K) 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 242
Kewal Sharma v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 243
Maqbool Buhroo and Others v. Ahad Buhroo and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 244
S.D. Mevada & Anr. v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir Through Food Safety Officer, Block Shopian 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 245
Assadullah Wagay and Others v. State 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 246
Union of India & Ors. v. Ex NK Roshan Lal 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 247
Ghulam Rasool Rather & Ors. v. Financial Commissioner Revenue & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 248
State of J&K Through Police Station Gangyal v. Mohd. Irfan 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 249
UT of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors. v. Mohd. Shafi Yatoo & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 250
Mohammad Ameen War v. State of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 251
Kamran Mushtaq v. UT of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 252
Yawar Ahmad Bhagat v. UT of J&K through P/S Yaripora 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 253
Makhan Din v. Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 254
Mohd. Sultan Dar & Ors. v. UT of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 255
Harsh Dev Singh v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 256
Principal, Woodland House School & Ors. v. Shakeel Ahmad Malik 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 257
Khalid Fayaz Ahanger & Ors. v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 258
Union Territory of J&K Through Police Station Sumbal v. Parvaiz Ahmed Ganie 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 259
J&K Private Schools United Front v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 260
Manzoor Ahmad Bhat v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 261
Ghulam Mohi Uddin Sheikh v. Union Territory of J&K and others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 262
Peerzada Mohammad Syed v. State (Now UT) of Jammu & Kashmir and Other 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 263
Angrez Singh Through His Attorney Ashok Kumar & Anr. v. Inspector General Registration, Jammu & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 264
Ibrar Bashir Shirazi v. University of Kashmir 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 265
Vishwa Bharati Women's Welfare Institution v. Amina Naseem and others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 266
Farooq Ahmad Dar v. UT of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 267
Shahnawaz Amin Shah v. UT of J&K and Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 268
Talib Hussain v. UT of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 269
Abdul Aziz Mir v. Tariq Ahmad Mir 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 270
Shahid Mehraj v. Union Territory of J&K and others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 271
Mohammed Ashraf Mir v. Wazir Reshi 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 272
M/S Alpine Agro Services v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 273
Vikar Mustafa Shonthu v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 274
Manga Ram v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 275
Mst. Jana (Dead) Through LRs v. Assadullah Raina & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 276
Showkat Ahmad Seer v. Union Territory of J&K Through Police Station Qalamabad 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 277
State (Now Union Territory) of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors. v. Raghu Singh Jandla 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 278
Mohammad Iqbal Wani v. UT of J&K & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 279
Nazir Ahmad Mir & Ors. v. Ishfaq Ahmad Mir & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 280
Union Territory of J&K v. Parvaiz Ahmed Ganie 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 281
Mohd. Kabir v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 282
Kanchan Devi v. Amit Sharma 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 283
Atiqa Begum & Ors. v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 284
Afroz Ahmed Sheikh v. Narcotics Control Bureau, Jammu Zone 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 285
M. Naseer U Zaman v. Managing Director J&K and Ladakh Financial Corporation & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 286
Judgments/Orders:
Case Title: Saleema & Ors Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 1
Reaffirming that women accused of non-bailable offences constitute a distinct class deserving special judicial consideration, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted bail to three women undertrials in a murder case, holding that courts must not allow themselves to be held hostage by the rigour of Section 437 CrPC while dealing with bail pleas of women.
Case-Title: STATE OF J & K vs NAZIR AHMAD BHAT AND OTHERS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 2
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court set aside the conviction and sentence of four accused in a criminal appeal arising from a fatal free-fight between rival groups.
It observed that the prosecution failed to prove common intention and specific culpability beyond reasonable doubt, especially when a majority of co-accused were acquitted on the same evidence.
Case-Title: State of Jammu and Kashmir vs Ahsan-ul-Haq Khan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 3
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that a government servant cannot be prematurely retired merely on the basis of vague and unsubstantiated allegations regarding his “bad reputation,” especially when such observations are not supported by any cogent material from the service record.
J&K&L High Court Quashes Cancellation Of Land Allotted Under Erstwhile Princely-Era Law
Case-Title: Lt. Col. Daljit Singh Dogra vs State of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 4
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashed a government order cancelling the allotment of alternative land granted to a landowner in lieu of land acquired during the erstwhile princely rule, holding that the cancellation was arbitrary, legally untenable, and unsupported by record or statutory authority.
Case Title: Bharat Oil Traders v.s Assistant Commissioner & anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 5
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the 2019 amendment to the GST law changing the limitation period for claiming refund of unutilised input tax credit cannot be applied retrospectively to deny refund claims relating to periods prior to 1 February 2019.
Deputation Does Not Bar Claim For Equivalent Designation Based On Experience: J&K&L High Court
Case-Title: Rishi Kumar vs Chenab Valley Power Projects Ltd
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 6
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that experience gained in the parent department cannot be excluded while determining equivalent designation in the borrowing organisation.
A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani said that the stand that a deputationist cannot seek equivalent designation in the borrowing department is misconceived, palpably erroneous, unfair, unreasonable, and discriminatory.
Case-Title: Sushma Devi vs State of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 7
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a candidate who marries outside the concerned district cannot insist on the benefit of local residence preference in public recruitment unless such residence is established by cogent and reliable documentary evidence.
Case Title: UT Of J&K Vs Bilal Ahmad Wani
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 8
Clarifying the evidentiary standards required for offences under the Information Technology Act, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that mere seizure of electronic devices or storage media is wholly insufficient to attract Section 67 of the IT Act unless the prosecution proves, through authenticated electronic evidence and admissible expert opinion, that the alleged obscene material was published or transmitted in electronic form.
Case Title: Ghulam Rasool Bhat Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 9
Addressing a recurring claim in service matters, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh made it clear that mere continuity of service does not entitle an employee to retrospective regularisation. The Court held that under the J&K Civil Services (Special Provisions) Act, 2010, statutory regularisation can operate only prospectively, irrespective of the stage at which the qualifying period of service is completed.
Case Title: Nazir Ahmad Bhat Vs Chairman/ Managing Director J&K Bank Corporate Office
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 10
Emphasising the transformative impact of the 2016 amendment to the SARFAESI Act, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a borrower's right of redemption no longer survives till the completion of sale and instead stands extinguished on the date of valid publication of the notice of sale.
Case Title: State Of J&K Vs Ahsan-ul-Haq
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 11
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that while involvement in a criminal case may be a relevant factor for determining the continued utility of a government servant, it cannot be the sole basis for their premature retirement.
Case Title: Sarwa Zahoor Vs Deputy Director Enforcement Directorate & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 12
Clarifying the scope of appellate powers under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the Appellate Tribunal's power under Section 26(4) of the Act is of wide amplitude and necessarily includes the power to remand a matter to the Adjudicating Authority as a consequential and ancillary power when an order is set aside.
Case-Title: Mehbooba Mufti vs Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 13
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation seeking directions for detention of undertrial prisoners of the Union Territory within prisons located in Jammu & Kashmir, holding that Public Interest Litigation cannot be used as a political platform or as a tool to gain electoral advantage.
Case Title: M/S Ace Enterprises Vs Shri Jagdeep Rana
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 14
Underscoring the strict procedural safeguards governing prosecution for perjury, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that where an alleged false affidavit or statement is made in proceedings before the Supreme Court, it is the Supreme Court alone which has the jurisdiction to initiate perjury proceedings, and no subordinate court or trial court can assume such competence.
Third Party Using Land With Owner's Consent Cannot Be Prosecuted For Encroachment: J&K&L High Court
Case-Title: Shafiq Anjum vs State of J&K & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 15
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that coercive action cannot be taken against a third party who merely used land with the permission of its recorded owner, especially when the statute invoked is inapplicable.
Case Title: Abdul Hamid Wani Vs Abdul Hamid Lone
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 16
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that where a drawer of a cheque deliberately appends a signature that does not tally with his specimen signature available with the bank, with the intent to prevent the cheque from being honoured, the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, would stand attracted.
Case Title: Farooq Ahmad Dar Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 17
While reaffirming that justice must ordinarily be administered strictly in the manner prescribed by law, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court underscored that in exceptional factual situations, courts cannot remain indifferent to human consequences.
Case-Title: Nisar Ahmad Kakapori and Anr vs Aijaz Ahmad Kadoo& Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 18
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that once a trial court has finally decided an issue, it lacks jurisdiction to reopen, revisit, or refer the same issue to the High Court, particularly when the order has attained finality and has not been challenged through appropriate legal remedies.
Case Title: YASIR AMIN KHANDAY AND ANOTHER Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 19
Emphasizing victim protection over procedural shortcuts for the accused, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the timeline mandated under the proviso to Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is designed to deliver speedy justice to victims and cannot be invoked to grant automatic bail to the accused merely due to a delay in completing the trial.
Case Title: Abdul Hamid Wani Vs Abdul Hamid Lone
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 20
Emphasising that a material alteration in a cheque does not, by itself, absolve the accused of criminal liability, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the decisive factor under the Negotiable Instruments Act is not the mere presence of an alteration, but the identity of the person who made it.
Case Title: Dinesh Singh Chib & Ors Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 21
Delineating the limits of judicial review in recruitment matters, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed two clubbed writ petitions seeking age relaxation for participation in a fresh recruitment process for the post of Sub-Inspector in the J&K Police.
Case Title: Ishant Sharma v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors.
Citation: LiveLaw 2026 (JKL) 22
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the suspension of a government employee solely on the basis of criminal proceedings pending against his father is impermissible in law, as penal liability cannot be inherited by legal heirs.
Case Title: Shrisht Pal Sharma v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 23
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an employer cannot revise service records post-retirement to the prejudice of an employee in order to cover up its own lapses, especially when the employee was not responsible for maintaining the service book and the issue stood settled by an earlier judgment of the Court.
S. 223 BNSS | Pre-Cognizance Hearing Not Mandatory For S. 138 NI Act Proceedings: J&K&L High Court
Case-Title: Jasveer Singh and others vs Jugal Kishore
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 24
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court dismissed a petition seeking the quashing of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, ruling that the requirement of hearing the accused at the pre-cognisance stage under Section 223 BNSS stands dispensed with for cheque dishonour cases.
Case Title: MOHAMMAD SHAIF BHAT ALIAS WANI & ANR Vs. RAFI AHMAD BHAT ALIAS WANI AND ORS.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 25
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that once a plaint is returned by a court for lack of jurisdiction, the entire suit must commence de novo before the competent court, even if evidence of the parties stood concluded before the court which returned the plaint.
Case Title: Arfaz Mehboob Tak v. Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 26
Interpreting the stringent bail provisions under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act), the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that the expression “reasonable grounds” contained in Section 37 cannot be stretched to mean 'proved' under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam.
Case Title: Mst Khati Vs Abdul Rashid Salroo
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 27
Reaffirming the strict statutory mandate governing transfer of immovable property in Jammu & Kashmir, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that there cannot be a valid transfer of immovable property unless it is in writing and duly registered in accordance with Section 61(3) of the J&K Registration Act read with Section 138 of the J&K Transfer of Property Act.
Case Title: National Insurance Company Limited Vs Bashir & Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 28
Reaffirming consumer rights under insurance contracts, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an insurer cannot evade liability by relying on obscure or undisclosed exclusion clauses, particularly where the insurance policy is issued and marketed as a comprehensive cover for 'Standard Fire and Special Perils'.
Case Title: M/S ARISTO LABORATORIES PVT. LTD Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 29
Holding that jurisdiction under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act is governed by the nature of punishment prescribed and not merely by the chapter under which an offence falls, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that offences punishable with imprisonment not exceeding three years can validly be tried by a specially empowered Judicial Magistrate, notwithstanding that such offences fall under Chapter IV of the Act.
Case Title: Iqbal Singh Vs Durga Devi & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 30
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that the right of pre-emption is a very weak right, which can be lawfully defeated by a purchaser and can also be waived by the pre-emptor through conduct, as inferred from the facts and circumstances of a case.
Case Title: Gh. Rasool Ganie Vs State of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 31
Underscoring the foundational requirement of mens rea in criminal prosecution for forgery and corruption, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that even if the prosecution's version that a tampered document was used to secure a benefit is assumed to be correct, the mental element of the offence must still be independently proved.
Case-Title: Om Prakash & Ors. vs Bodh Raj & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 32
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the remand of proceedings under Section 133 CrPC to the Sub Divisional Magistrate (SDM) for fresh consideration, holding that procedural compliance under Chapter X CrPC is mandatory and cannot be bypassed even for a "well-meaning" order.
Case-Title: Mohd. Ashraf Dar vs UT of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 33
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the registration of an FIR against the Investigating Officer for alleged misconduct does not automatically weaken or nullify the material collected against an accused in a criminal case, and cannot by itself be a ground to grant anticipatory bail, particularly in cases involving commercial quantity under the NDPS Act.
Case Title: Malika Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 34
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the selection of teachers by a private unaided school culminates in a contract of service governed by private law, and that the rights claimed by candidates participating in such selection processes are purely private rights, which cannot be enforced through a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Case Title: UT Of J&K Vs Gulzar Ahmad Khan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 35
Holding that the State cannot wake up after decades to question the legality of an employee's appointment, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that having allowed an employee to serve for nearly 25 years, it is far too late for the authorities to contend that his appointment was illegal.
Case Title: New Convent High School Vs Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 36
Observing that commercialisation and profiteering do not completely rule out the element of creating surplus for future activities or earning reasonable returns on investments, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has clarified the constitutional position of private unaided educational institutions in the contemporary education system.
Case Title: Huzaif Ahmad Dar Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 37
Emphasising a cardinal constitutional safeguard, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that without a current or proximate threat to security, preventive detention becomes arbitrary and legally unsustainable.
Case Title: Mushtaq Ahmad Bakshi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 38
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that criminal prosecutions launched in connection with irregularities under the Roshni Act can lawfully continue even though the Act itself has been declared unconstitutional and void from its inception.
Case Title: State Of J&K Vs Dhanwanter Singh and ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 39
Holding that a Public Prosecutor has no independent authority to seek police remand under Section 167 CrPC unless such a request emanates from the Investigating Agency, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that police custody must be rooted in investigative necessity expressed by the police and not prosecutorial discretion.
Case Title: State of J&K V/s Dhanwanter Singh and ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 40
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that mere surrender of an absconding accused after filing of challan does not create a right in favour of the prosecution to seek police custody, particularly when the prosecution rests on the very same evidence on which co-accused have already been acquitted.
Case-Title: Union of India vs Rajammal
Citatio: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 41
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an appellate court can enhance compensation in a motor accident case even in the absence of a cross-appeal or cross-objections by the claimants, if the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is found to be inadequate.
Case-Title: Malika vs UT of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 42
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable for enforcement of service-related rights arising out of a private contract between a teacher and a private unaided school.
Case-Title: Mazeed Ali vs UT of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 43
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has granted bail to an accused charged under Section 27A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), holding that mere receipt of funds from co-accused does not prima facie amount to financing of illicit trafficking unless there is material to show actual financing or harbouring within the meaning of the statute.
Case Title: Sikander Sharma Vs Addl Commissioner Jammu and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 44
Reiterating a fundamental principle governing courtroom proceedings, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that statements and consent given by advocates, acting as authorised agents of litigants, are binding on the parties and operate as an estoppel in law. The Court made it clear that once an order is passed with such consent, a party cannot subsequently challenge it merely because it has had a change of mind.
Undenied Pleadings Are Deemed Admitted By Implication Under CPC: J&K&L High Court
Case Title: Hotel New Metro Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 45
Holding that undisputed pleadings amount to admission in law, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that where a respondent fails to specifically deny material factual assertions made in a plaint or writ petition, such facts are deemed to be admitted by implication in terms of Order VIII Rules 3 and 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Case Title: State Of J&K Vs Daleep Singh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 46
Reinforcing a core principle of criminal jurisprudence that a confession not recorded before a Magistrate has no substantive evidentiary value and cannot, by itself, be used to convict a co-accused, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh dismissed a criminal appeal against acquittal, holding that an alleged Panchayat confession being exculpatory, unproved, and uncorroborated could not sustain a conviction.
Case Title: Sapna Devi Vs Sheetal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 47
Reaffirming a fundamental principle of public employment law, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a recruitment process stands vitiated ab initio if the selecting authority alters or expands eligibility criteria midstream or applies un-notified qualifications, and mere participation of candidates does not create estoppel nor cure such illegality. The Court ruled that any such exercise strikes at the root of equality and fairness guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
Case Title: Abdul Rashid Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 48
In a reaffirmation of personal liberty and the constitutional guarantee of a speedy trial, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that past conduct, for which an accused has already faced prosecution and detention, cannot by itself justify continued incarceration in the absence of credible and proximate evidence linking him to the present offence.
Case Title: Priyanka Rakwal Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 49
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a reservation certificate that substantively satisfies statutory eligibility conditions on the cut-off date cannot be invalidated solely due to a defect in format, especially when the defect is clarified by the issuing authority and the candidate's eligibility itself is not in dispute.
Case Title: M/s Krishna Engineering Works Industrial Estate
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 50
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the State cannot delay payments to contractors for years and yet seek to discharge its obligation by paying only the principal amount, without any consequence.
Case Title: Himani Sharma Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 51
Underscoring discipline and accountability in public service, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that issues relating to transport and infrastructure can never form a justified ground for not attending the duties. The Court made this observation while dismissing a writ petition filed by a contractual Mid-Level Health Provider (MLHP) challenging the termination of her services under the National Health Mission (NHM).
Case Title: Shareen Gani v. UT of J&K & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 52
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted bail to a woman accused in a kidnapping and murder case after she remained in custody for more than twelve years, holding that continued incarceration was unjustified in light of trial delay and the circumstance that her minor child had been living with her inside jail.
Case Title: Younis Ali Vs Union Of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 53
Highlighting the limited scope of judicial interference in recruitment matters of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the decision of the Review Medical Board is final and cannot be subjected to further review or re-examination by courts, save in exceptional circumstances such as procedural violations or malafides.
Case Title: Dr. Posh Charak and others Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 54
The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that when the State's own official records and admissions establish illegality, the case ceases to be a disputed factual controversy and squarely becomes a matter of constitutional enforcement.
Case Title: M/s Ram Kour Behari Lal and Co Vs M/s Hakam Chand and Co. and others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 55
Holding that courts must adopt an adjudication-friendly approach when a suit pending at the stage of final arguments is dismissed for non-prosecution, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that applications seeking condonation of delay and restoration should ordinarily be viewed liberally unless the cause shown is a mere attempt to “honeyfuggle the court.”
Case Title: Deepak Bawa Sharma Vs Asif Iqbal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 56
Reiterating the limited scope of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the question whether a cheque was issued merely as security or in discharge of a legally enforceable debt is essentially a matter of evidence and cannot ordinarily be adjudicated at the stage of quashing criminal proceedings.
Case Title: Union Of India Vs M/S Tarmat Limited
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 57
Holding that debarment is never permanent and its duration must depend upon the gravity of the misconduct, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that even where a contractor is found guilty of forgery and financial impropriety, punitive action cannot be allowed to operate endlessly. The Court underscored that penalties in contractual matters must remain proportionate, reasonable, and time-bound.
Case Title: Shabnam Akhter Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 58
Spotlighting the need to distinguish suspicion from culpable intent under anti-terror laws, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that mere receipt and safe custody of money, without proof of intention or knowledge to further terrorist activities, does not prima facie attract offences under Sections 38 or 40 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
Illegal Occupation Of Shamilat/Kahcharaie Land Can Never Ripen Into Legal Right: J&K&L High Court
Case Title: Mehraj Ud Din Malik Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 59
Reiterating that illegal occupation of common village land can never crystallise into a legal right, even where permanent structures have been raised, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that the law prohibiting encroachment upon Shamilat/Kahcharaie land was firmly in existence much before the 2020 amendment to Section 133(2) of the Land Revenue Act.
Case Title: Sabza Begum Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 60
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that mechanical rejection of compensation claims on technical grounds like limitation is impermissible, particularly where innocent civilians have lost their lives in terrorist violence.
Case Title: Noor Illahi Faktoo Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 61
The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh underscored that while practical assistance from subordinate officers is permissible and often necessary in large administrations, a statutory authority cannot abdicate its core decision-making function or act merely as a rubber stamp.
Case Title: Mazeed Ali Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 62
Holding that Section 27-A of the NDPS Act cannot be mechanically invoked merely on the basis of bank transactions or custodial statements of co-accused, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that the prosecution must disclose prima facie material showing deliberate financial facilitation of illicit drug trafficking or active harbouring, clearly distinct from routine monetary dealings or alleged association.
Case Title: Joginder Singh & Anr Vs UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 63
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh reiterated that pre-trial incarceration cannot be justified solely on the gravity of allegations, particularly where the accused are not alleged to have committed the principal offence and their role is confined to alleged abetment.
Case-Title: Altaf Hussain & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 64
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that while participation in a recruitment process does not confer an indefeasible right to appointment, the State cannot arbitrarily cancel a selection process that has reached an advanced stage without a rational basis.
Case Title: Mumtaz Ahmad Vs Collector Land Acquisition Rajouri
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 65
Emphasising that land acquisition compensation cannot be determined in a mechanical manner divorced from realities on the ground, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that it is ultimately in the interest of justice that land losers are awarded fair compensation, taking into account accessibility to roads, locational advantages and surrounding development.
Case-Title: Shabnam Akhter vs UT of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 66
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted bail to a woman accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), holding that mere custody of cash at the instance of her husband, without material showing intention or knowledge to further terrorist activities, is insufficient to attract offences under Sections 38 and 40 of the Act.
Insurer Cannot Demand Proof Of Source Of Income Beyond ITR In Accident Claim: J&K&L High Court
Case-Title: The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Prem Gupta & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 67
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that once the income of a deceased victim is duly proved through Income Tax Returns (ITR), the Insurance Company cannot insist on separate proof of the source of such income in motor accident compensation proceedings.
Case Title: Himmat Kumar Raina v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 68
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh granted relief to an airman who joined the Jammu & Kashmir Administrative Service without prior discharge from the Air Force, holding that strict enforcement of service rules must yield to equitable considerations in exceptional circumstances.
Case Title: Mohd Mansha & Ors Vs Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 69
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that Re-testing may be an important right of an accused, but its mechanical and haphazard import from other legislations without the accompanying statutory restrictions is impermissible.
Case Title: Ch. Mohd. Sadiq Vs Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 70
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the State and its instrumentalities cannot continue to occupy private land for decades without initiating acquisition proceedings or paying compensation, reiterating that deprivation of property without authority of law violates the constitutional and human right to property protected under Article 300-A of the Constitution.
Case Title: Altaf Hussain & Anr Vs Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 71
Emphasising that the State's power to abandon a recruitment process is not absolute, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that once a selection process reaches an advanced stage, its cancellation must rest on justifiable and rational grounds.
Case Title: Murad Ali & Ors Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 72
Emphasising that bail orders in serious criminal cases cannot be passed in a cursory or mechanical manner, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that courts are duty-bound to indicate reasons reflecting a prima facie satisfaction while granting bail, particularly where the accused is charged with grave offences punishable with death or life imprisonment.
Case Title: Chuni Lal Vs J&K Bank
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 73
Explaining that the statutory protection over pensionary benefits does not extend beyond the stage of actual payment, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that once pensionary benefits are credited to a pensioner's bank account, they lose the protection under Section 11 of the Pensions Act, 1871 and can be subjected to recovery towards enforceable contractual liabilities, including liability arising as a guarantor.
Case Title: Changa Ram Va State of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 74
Observing that contractual forfeiture clauses cannot be pressed into service mechanically to penalise a citizen for lapses attributable to the State, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that where the alleged default itself flows from the failure of the authority, forfeiture of earnest money and denial of allotment would be wholly arbitrary and unsustainable in law.
Case: Satish Sasan & Ors. v. State of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 75
Reaffirming the limits of writ jurisdiction and the doctrine of delay and laches, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh dismissed a petition challenging SRO 320 dated 31.08.1985, a Government notification that published a list of Wakf properties in parts of Tehsil Poonch.
Case Title: Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology, Jammu Vs Dr Ankur Sharma & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 76
Holding that Schedule XIX of the CSR and Rule 14(b) of the Leave Rules read in conjunction with Rule 10 of the Conduct Rules leave “no iota of doubt” that a Government servant who takes up foreign assignment without prior permission commits misconduct inviting disciplinary action, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh set aside a Central Administrative Tribunal order that had directed grant of post-facto sanction to a university professor for foreign employment.
Case Title: Muzzafar Farooq Mir Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 77
In a scathing indictment of administrative casualness in preventive detention matters, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a detention order passed under the Public Safety Act, observing that “what is a casual for the District Magistrate Srinagar is a causality to the fundamental right of the personal liberty of the petitioner.”
Case Name : Abdul Salam Dar v. High Court of J&K and others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 78
A Division Bench of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar held that an employee who accepts promotion to a different cadre without challenging the promotions of his juniors in a parallel cadre, when the employer had relaxed the qualifications for others based on seniority, cannot subsequently seek retrospective parity in promotion.
Case Title: Shabir Ahmad Dar Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 79
In a strong indictment of executive overreach, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 was invoked against a young man “by non-seriousness of standard with which even a motorist is not subjected to a routine traffic challan,” quashing his preventive detention as illegal from its very inception.
Case Title: Noushad Ahmad Vs Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 80
Holding that territorial jurisdiction is a matter of law rooted in the essential facts of a dispute and not a mobile privilege dependent upon a litigant's convenience, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that the expression “cause of action” cannot be interpreted liberally to allow parties to indulge in forum shopping.
Case Title: Anoop Uppal Vs Jammu Municipal Corporation
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 81
The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh directed the Chief Secretary of Jammu & Kashmir to conduct a probe into the role of officials of the Jammu Municipal Corporation after finding that a fresh structural safety audit was ordered despite an earlier engineering report obtained pursuant to court directions declaring the premises safe.
Case Title: State Of J&K Vs Javaid Ahmad Ganai
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 82
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that appointment to a higher post on compassionate grounds cannot be claimed as a matter of right and that the power to grant such appointment lies exclusively with the Government and is purely discretionary.
Case Title: Mahavir Singh @ Appu v. UT of J&K & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 83
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that preventive detention under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (PITNDPS) can be ordered only when the activities of a detenue fall within the statutory definition of “illicit traffic”.
BSF Court Of Inquiry Can Proceed Alongside Criminal Trial : J&K high Court
Case Name : Akhand Prakash Shahi vs. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 84
A Division Bench of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar held that preliminary Court of Inquiry under BSF Rules is merely a fact-finding exercise and it can proceed during pendency of a criminal trial. It does not amount to parallel departmental proceedings or cause prejudice to the accused employee.
Case Title: Sham Lal v. State of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 85
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a victim who suffers permanent disability due to electrocution caused by negligence of electricity department officials is entitled to compensation, and that such liability can arise under public law jurisdiction where negligence is established.
Case Title: Tirath Singh Vs State of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 86
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that although the prosecution bears the primary burden of proving guilt, courts are entitled to draw an adverse inference under Section 106 of the Evidence Act where the accused fails to explain facts especially within his knowledge after the prosecution has established foundational circumstances.
Case-Title: Gopal Dass vs Surinder Kumar
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 87
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act should not be dismissed for want of prosecution when the accused has not yet been served and the matter is still at a preliminary stage.
Case Title: Sarita Devi Vs Mohan Singh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 88
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that even though a private agreement cannot dissolve a statutory marriage, such agreement can be relied upon to determine whether the spouses were living separately by mutual consent, in which case the bar under Section 488(5) Cr.P.C. (Pari Materia with Sec 125 CrPC) would operate to deny maintenance.
Case Title: UT of J&K Vs Maqbool Sheikh & connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 89
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the employer is not barred from correcting pay fixation and pension where employees were wrongly granted dual benefits, but recovery of excess payments from Group-C and Group-D employees, particularly after long periods, would be impermissible in law.
Case Title: Mohd. Ashraf Dar & Ors. v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 90
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that where seized forest produce is not Government property, confiscation of the carrier cannot be finalized unless the offender is first convicted in criminal proceedings. The Court has clarified that independent confiscatory jurisdiction without conviction is permissible only when the offence relates to Government property.
Case Title:Mohammad Yaseen & Anr v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 91
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that provisions contained in Rule 349 of the J&K Police Rules are mandatory and unless the substance of a complaint against a police officer alleged to have committed an offence under the Ranbir Penal Code in the colour of his duties is reported to the District Magistrate, proceedings initiated by the police or the Magistrate would become invalid.
Case Title: Omesh Singh & Ors. v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 92
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an administrative government order cannot override or supersede a statutory notification issued under the Jammu & Kashmir Land Revenue Act altering territorial limits of revenue administrative units.
Case Title: Ghulam Mohammad Rah Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 93
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that rejection of a reference under Section 18 of the J&K Land Acquisition Act on the ground of limitation cannot be sustained where compensation awarded for the acquired land was never paid to the claimants.
Case Title: Gurjit Singh v. Narcotics Control Bureau, Jammu Zone
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 94
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that Section 479 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) must be interpreted harmoniously with its provisos and does not mandate automatic release of an accused on bail upon completion of the statutory period of detention.
Case Title: Shokat Ali v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 95
Emphasising that preventive detention is a precautionary measure based on the detaining authority's satisfaction regarding the likelihood of a person indulging in prejudicial activities in future the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that the grant of bail in criminal cases or the absence of a move for cancellation of bail does not invalidate a preventive detention order where the objective is to prevent conduct threatening public order.
Case Title: State of J&K & Ors v. Irshad Ahmad Sheikh & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 96
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has reiterated that claims for compassionate appointment are governed strictly by the time limits prescribed under the Jammu and Kashmir (Compassionate Appointment) Rules, 1994, and cannot be entertained when the statutory period has long expired.
Case Title: Bansi Lal & Ors. v. State of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 97
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that where mutation proceedings under the Agrarian Reforms Act are conducted in violation of the statutory procedure governing their attestation, the revisional authority is competent to exercise jurisdiction and examine the legality of such mutations. The Court added that attestation of mutations contrary to the prescribed procedure raises a question of law warranting revisional scrutiny.
Case Title: Mudasir Ahmad Bhat Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 98
Holding that the handling of preventive detention matters in the Union Territory reflects a troubling lack of administrative vigilance, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh observed that there is no one at the end of the respondents bearing alertness and aliveness to the handling of preventive detention cases.
Case Title: Sanjay Gupta & Anr Vs Prem Kumar
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 99
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, the statutory presumption regarding responsibility for publication of a newspaper operates only against the “Editor”. The Court clarified that the Act does not recognise other designations such as Chief Editor or Managing Editor for raising such presumption, though they may still be prosecuted if specific allegations are made against them.
Case Title: Sudhir Kumar Vs Peerzada Tasaduq Hussain (Drug Inspector)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 100
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh reiterated that the statutory safeguards available to an accused under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act must be strictly adhered to and that criminal proceedings cannot continue if the accused is denied the opportunity to challenge the Government Analyst's report through re-analysis by the Central Drugs Laboratory.
Case Title: Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Romesh Chander & Ors. and Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Pritam Singh & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 101
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that an insurance company cannot avoid liability for compensation on the plea that the injured persons were gratuitous passengers when the evidence on record establishes that they were pedestrians hit by the offending vehicle.
Case Title: Mohammad Yaqoob Beigh Vs Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 102
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that when prosecution witnesses are examined during proceedings under Section 299 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against an absconding accused, the accused, upon appearing before the trial court, has the discretion to admit those depositions, and the prosecution cannot insist on recalling such witnesses merely to strengthen its case.
Case Title: Mohd. Umar Nizami Vs Collector Land Acquisition (ACR), Ramban & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 103
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a District Judge hearing a reference under the Land Acquisition Act functions as a Civil Court and passes judicial orders. Consequently, such orders cannot be challenged through a writ petition under Article 226 but can only be examined under the Court's supervisory jurisdiction, the court explained.
Case Title: Subash Raina v. State of J&K & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 104
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that although the Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board is a statutory body constituted under legislation, it cannot be treated as “State” or an authority within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India in the absence of governmental control financial, functional or administrative.
Case Title: Raghbir Singh v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 105
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that accidental injuries suffered by armed forces personnel cannot be classified as “war injuries” or “war casualties” unless there exists a direct and causal nexus between the injury and operational duties in a Government-notified operational area.
Case Title: Kamal @ Kaka v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 106
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that allegations relating to transportation of bovine animals without permission cannot, by themselves, justify preventive detention under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 unless the detaining authority records satisfaction that such activities have resulted in or have the potential to cause public outrage or disturb public order.
Case Title: Rehmatullah Naik v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 107
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that the expression “surrender of possession of the property to the competent authority,” appearing in proviso (b) to Section 7 of the Jammu & Kashmir Migrant Immovable Property (Preservation, Protection and Restraint on Distress Sales) Act, 1997, must be construed to include constructive and symbolic possession and not merely actual physical surrender.
Case-Title: ROBKAR vs SANJEEV VERMA, COMMISSIONER/ SECRETARY, GAD, JAMMU
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 108
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that the State cannot defeat the effect of a judicial decision by initiating a belated departmental enquiry and simultaneously declaring an employee “unfit” for promotion.
Case Title: UT of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors Vs Dr. Jyoti Gupta & Ors (Connected Matters)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 109
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that appointments made under the J&K Medical & Dental Education Academic Arrangement Rules, 2020 cannot be used to extend the tenure of posts such as Registrar, Tutor, or Demonstrator in medical and dental education beyond the maximum period of three years prescribed under the relevant recruitment framework.
Case Title: Kripal Singh Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 110
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a Special Police Officer (SPO) engaged under Section 18 of the Police Act does not hold a civil post and therefore cannot claim the protection of Article 311 of the Constitution or the disciplinary safeguards available to regular members of the police force. The Court clarified that while an SPO may claim a limited right of hearing in adherence to principles of natural justice, he cannot insist on a full-fledged departmental enquiry before disengagement.
Case Title: Asif Amin Thoker Th. His Sister Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 111
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the health condition of a family member of a detenue is a matter of paramount consideration, warranting judicial intervention in appropriate cases to safeguard humanitarian concerns.
The Court was hearing a bail application filed by an accused under the provisions of the NDPS Act seeking interim relief to enable him to attend to his minor daughter, who was scheduled to undergo surgery, and to take care of her during the pre and post-operative period.
Case Title: Chuni Lal Vs Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 112
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the protection available to pension amounts from attachment ceases once the amount is credited to the pensioner's bank account, and such amount can be subjected to recovery towards the pensioner's liability as a guarantor for a loan default.
Case Title: Mushtaq Ahmad Ganie v. Union Territory of J&K & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 113
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not prohibit registration of FIR or investigation into offences under Sections 172 to 188 IPC, but only bars the Court from taking cognizance in the absence of a complaint by the concerned public servant, and such objections are to be considered at the stage of charge or discharge.
Case Title: Gaganpreet Singh Wazir Vs Food Corporation of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 114
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that no employee can claim a right to a particular posting solely based on transfer guidelines, as such administrative instructions do not have statutory force and cannot curtail the employer's authority to effect transfers.
Case Title: Ajaz Ahmed v. UT of J&K through SHO Police Station Poonch & Superintendent, District Jail, Poonch.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 115
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a person who has been tendered pardon under Section 343 of BNSS, corresponding to Section 306 of the CrPC and examined as an approver, cannot be detained in custody in an absolute manner until the termination of trial. The Court clarified that the statutory purpose of custodial detention of an approver is to safeguard him and secure truthful testimony, not to punish him.
Case Title: Javid Ahmad Zargar v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 116
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, while ordering the release of a detenue directly from the courtroom, held that it could not permit the continuation of a preventive detention order that results in trampling of the fundamental right to personal liberty, particularly where such detention is founded on no factual or legal basis.
Case Title: Arjun Kumar Sharma v. State of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 117
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the doctrine of contributory negligence cannot ordinarily be invoked against children of tender age, and that authorities maintaining hazardous public installations are under a heightened duty to ensure adequate safety measures.
Case Title: Mumtaz Ahmed v. UT of J&K and others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 118
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the activities of Over Ground Workers (OGWs), which are often concealed and detected through intelligence inputs, can validly form the basis of preventive detention under the Public Safety Act.
Case-Title: Sajjad Ahmed vs Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 119
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court directed the Union Ministry of Home Affairs to take steps for retrieval of a minor boy who was deported to Pakistan and to consider his application for grant of Indian citizenship, emphasizing the need to balance sovereign powers with humanitarian considerations.
Case Title: Anjum Mehmood Vs Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 120
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a juvenile in conflict with law cannot claim bail as a matter of right under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, irrespective of the gravity of the charge. The Court clarified that the proviso to Section 12 permits denial of bail if the release would defeat the ends of justice, which includes consideration of the nature and gravity of the offence.
Case Title: Sehran Bashir Nadaf v. Union Territory of J&K and Others.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 121
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be reduced to a fragile right vulnerable to executive action based on unfounded or illusory suspicion. It clarified that preventive detention cannot be invoked on hollow material and that deprivation of liberty, particularly of a young person, must be supported by substantive and credible grounds.
Case Title: Rubeena Begum Vs Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 122
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a registered owner who has executed a power of attorney in favour of an accused and parted with possession of a vehicle cannot maintain an application for release of the vehicle when it is seized for involvement in transportation of arms and ammunition in a terror-related case.
Case Title: Babu Ram & Ors. Vs Kewal Krishan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 123
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that if a Magistrate is not satisfied about the sufficiency of material collected while recording preliminary evidence and orders an inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, she/he cannot pass an order summoning the accused at a later stage on the very same material.
Case Title: Divisional Manager, J&K State Forest Corporation v. Satish Kumar.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 124
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that an appeal under Section 30 of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 is maintainable only when a substantial question of law arises, and the appellate court cannot re-evaluate findings of fact recorded by the Commissioner. It further held that deposit of the entire awarded amount, including interest, is a mandatory precondition for maintainability of such appeal.
Case Title: Fatima Bano v. State of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 125
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the principle of subsistence of right cannot be invoked where the very basis of engagement ceases to exist due to relocation or administrative restructuring of an Anganwadi Centre following migration of the local population, and that a fresh selection process for the relocated centre constitutes a valid and independent exercise.
Case Title: Amit Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 126
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that neither the Court nor disciplinary authorities can refuse to consider medical records produced by an employee without first ascertaining their veracity, and that failure to do so vitiates disciplinary proceedings.
Case Title: Petitioner Vs Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 127
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed the dismissal order passed against an employee of the Jammu & Kashmir Housing Board, holding that the disciplinary proceedings were vitiated as the Inquiry Officer relied upon statements recorded during a preliminary enquiry without providing the delinquent employee an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses.
Case Title: Ghulam Nabi Bhat & Ors. v. State of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 128
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar held that the disengagement of daily rated workers by a public sector undertaking, compelled by the closure of its operations and acute financial constraints, does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution.
Case-Title: Atiqa Begum and Ors. Vs UT of J&K and Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 129
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that not every dispute relating to compensation under the National Highways Act, 1956 is required to be referred to a civil court, clarifying that only such disputes which the competent authority is unable to decide without adjudication fall within the ambit of reference under Section 3H(4) of the Act.
Case Title: Kali Dass & Anr. v. State of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 130
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a second FIR is not barred in law where it relates to a distinct and wider conspiracy, even if it is connected to an earlier incident, reiterating that the governing principle is the “test of sameness.”
Case Title: Petitioners v. Union Territory Through Police Station Ram Munshi Bagh & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 131
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a petition seeking quashing of an FIR registered against a group of accused, including a reputed Sufi singer in a parking dispute, observing that the investigation had been unnecessarily delayed due to the petitioners misreading an interim order as granting them absolute immunity from the course of law.
Mere Abuse Or Uttering Caste Name Not Offence Under SC/ST Act: J&K&L High Court
Case Title: Santosha Devi v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 132
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that for an offence under Section 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to be made out, it is not sufficient that the accused merely abuses a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or merely utters a caste name. The Court clarified that the essential requirement is that the accused abuses such a member “by the caste name” in any place within public view.
Case Title: Bhopinder Singh v. State of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 133
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh granted bail to a murder accused who had remained in custody for over nine years, holding that prolonged incarceration, when weighed against the fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, tilts the balance in favour of release.
Case Title: Santosha Devi v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 134
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the bar against anticipatory bail under Sections 18 and 18A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is not absolute. If a prima facie reading of the FIR or complaint does not disclose the essential ingredients constituting an offence under the Act, courts can grant pre-arrest bail.
Case Title: Gopal Krishan v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 135
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that while there is no legal requirement to appoint a Presenting Officer in every departmental enquiry, the proceedings are vitiated if the Inquiry Officer assumes the role of a prosecutor, denies the delinquent employee the right to cross-examine witnesses, and creates a reasonable apprehension of bias
Case Title: Syed Lutfullah Shah & Anr. v. A.W. Kirpak Supdt. Engineer & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 136
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that while courts may, under Section 57 of the Evidence Act, resort to appropriate books or documents of reference on matters of public history, the question whether a person holds title to a particular property cannot be treated as a matter of public history. Historical works cannot be used to establish title to property, as such questions are of a private or local nature, the Court underscored.
Case Title: Subash Chander Sharma v. SHO P/S Anti Corruption Bureau Jammu & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 137
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a Magistrate or Special Court has the power to direct further investigation in a case where the investigation conducted is defective or certain aspects have not been properly investigated, and such a direction can be issued even after cognizance has been taken, by invoking Section 173(8) read with Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Case Title: Ishfaq Ahmad Wani Vs Chairman Legislative Council & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 138
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a disciplinary authority cannot review or revisit its earlier decision taken based on an enquiry report unless the applicable service rules expressly confer such power, and any subsequent attempt to reopen the matter would be legally unsustainable.
Case Title: Amit Kumar Bansal & Ors. Vs Sanjeev Kumar Gupta & connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 139
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that merely being a Managing Director or Director of a company does not make a person liable for prosecution under the Drug and Cosmetics Act, 1940, in the absence of specific allegations ascribing a role in the commission of the offence. The Court clarified that the presumption under Section 34 of the Act arises only against the person nominated by the company as being in charge and responsible for the conduct of its business.
Case Title: Amin Allaie v. National Investigation Agency
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 140
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act cannot be refused where the prosecution relies primarily on approver statements and uncorroborated telephonic contacts, in the absence of recovery or material establishing prima facie involvement.
Case Title: Subash Chander Sharma v. SHO P/S Anti Corruption Bureau Jammu & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 141
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the purpose of investigation is not to somehow implicate a person but to unearth the truth, and it is the duty of the investigating agency to ascertain the veracity of the defence projected by a suspect. The Court observed that when an accused provides an explanation in answer to a questionnaire, the agency must verify the same before seeking to rely upon evidence that may be tainted by self-interest.
Case Title: Ajaz Ahmed v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 142
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the continued detention of an approver who has complied with the conditions of pardon and stood by his disclosure without contradiction may violate Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the sacred human right of personal liberty.
Case Title: Rajeshwar Singh Vs State & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 143
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 acts as a shield to public servants who cannot be removed from service without government sanction, protecting them from false and unwarranted prosecution.
Case Title: Naresh Kumar & Others v. J&K Special Tribunal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 144
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that where mutations have not been challenged and have attained finality, the writ court cannot examine their validity or comment upon the manner in which they were attested.
Case Title: Union Territory of J&K v. Piaray Lal Tickoo
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 145
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that where the State invokes urgency provisions under Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1990, but fails to comply with the mandatory requirement under Section 17-A of paying 80% compensation before taking possession, the acquisition proceedings lapse by operation of Section 11-B.
Case Title: Rubina v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 146
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed an application filed by the wife of former High Court Bar Association, Kashmir (HCBA) President Mian Abdul Qayoom seeking directions for his medical examination, holding that parallel directions cannot be issued when the Supreme Court is already seized of the matter and has issued specific and comprehensive directions governing the medical examination and treatment of the petitioner.
Case Title: Khalid Latif Butt Th. Abdul Latif Butt Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 147
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that prolonged custody of more than five years under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 does not automatically entitle an accused to bail when the prosecution has prima facie material demonstrating his direct involvement in raising and distributing terror funds, receiving money from Pakistan-based LeT handlers, and facilitating arms and ammunition for militant activities.
Case Title: Amin Allaie Vs National Investigating Agency, Jammu
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 148
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that prolonged incarceration of an accused, when coupled with the weakness of the prosecution case based on uncorroborated approver testimony and confessional statements of co-accused, can constitute a valid ground for grant of bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, even if the statutory threshold under Section 43-D(5) is otherwise satisfied.
Case Title: Union Territory of J&K v. Piaray Lal Tickoo
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 149
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that failure to publish the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1990, in newspapers having effective circulation in the locality of affected persons, coupled with absence of publication in the Government Gazette, vitiates the acquisition proceedings.
Case Title: Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement v. Yatin Yadav & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 150
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an application seeking cancellation of bail granted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 cannot succeed merely on the ground that the trial court did not properly appreciate the rigour of Section 45 of the PMLA.
Case Title: Abdul Aziz Bhat & Ors. v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 151
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that where a dispute arises as to the entitlement or apportionment of compensation for acquired land, the competent authority is under a statutory obligation under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 to refer such dispute to the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction and withhold disbursement of the amount until the dispute is resolved by that Court.
Case Title: Jasmeet Singh & Anr. v. Shafi Ahmed
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 152
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that while bank officials may fall within the definition of “public servants” under Section 21 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC), the protection under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is not available to them.
Case Title: Afroz Ahmed Sheikh v. Narcotics Control Bureau Jammu Zone
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 153
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that where an additional accused is summoned during the course of proceedings, the trial court must undertake a judicial determination as to whether such an accused is to be tried jointly with the existing accused or separately.
Case Title: UT of J&K & Ors. v. Raghu Singh Jandla
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 154
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that while seniority is generally determined from the date of substantive appointment, notional fixation of seniority is an equitable exception when the delay in appointment is attributable to the appointing authority.
Case Title: Mela Ram & Ors. Vs State of J&K & Anr. Arti Devi Vs State of J&K & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 155
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a woman having an extra-marital relationship with the husband does not qualify as a “relative” under Section 498-A of the Ranbir Penal Code (corresponding to Section 498-A IPC), and therefore cannot be prosecuted for cruelty or harassment under that provision.
Case Title: Feroz Ahmad Dar v. M/s Himalayan Motors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 156
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an Executing Court cannot proceed with coercive steps such as issuing levy warrants while an application under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the executability of a decree, remains pending.
Case Title: M/s Sports Goods Industry v. State of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 157
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh directed the allotment of two industrial sheds in favour of a Kashmiri Pandit migrant without charging any premium or arrears, holding that the action of the State in cancelling and re-allotting his industrial unit during migration was unjustified.
Case Title: Pushpa Devi & Ors. v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 158
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the State cannot be permitted to perfect its title over private land by invoking the doctrine of adverse possession against its own citizens and must either acquire such land in accordance with law or return it.
Case Title: Manga Ram v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 159
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the Investigating Officer has wide powers during investigation to collect evidence and include or alter the applicable Sections of law in the final charge-sheet, and that the Sections mentioned in the FIR are not final.
Case Title: Maqsad Ali Kohli v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 160
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a detention order founded on speculative apprehension of disturbance to Parliamentary elections, without any proximate or concrete material, fails to satisfy the requirement of a live nexus and is liable to be quashed.
Case Title: Harsh Dev Singh Vs UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 161
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the procedure prescribed under the Code of Civil Procedure is applicable to the trial of election petitions only, subject to the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Court clarified that anything contained in the CPC which is contrary to the provisions of the Act of 1951 cannot be made applicable to the trial of election petitions.
Interim Compensation U/S 143A NI Act Discretionary; Cannot Be Granted Mechanically: J&K&L High Court
Case Title: Nargees Javaid v. Ghulam Jeelani Nengroo
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 162
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the power to grant interim compensation under Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, is discretionary in nature and cannot be exercised in a routine or mechanical manner without recording reasons and undertaking a prima facie evaluation of the case.
Case Title: Smanla Dorje Nurboo v. Union Territory of Ladakh a/w Deldan Namgail v. Union Territory of Ladakh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 163
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh granted bail to a former MLA and an LAHDC councillor accused in connection with the Ladakh protest incident, holding that continued incarceration was not warranted in the facts of the case.
Case Title: Ghulam Nabi Bhat & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 164
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that entries in the General Land Register (GLR) do not carry probative value where such records are prepared without affording an opportunity of hearing to affected persons, and cannot be treated as conclusive proof of title over land.
Case Title: UT of J&K Vs Sameer Ahmad Bhat & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 165
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that where even after taking cognizance of offences, a Special Court finds that no scheduled offence is made out against the accused, the case must be transferred to the normal criminal court in terms of Section 20 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008.
Case Title: Ghulam Mohammad Sheikh & Ors. v. Gulzar Ahmad Sheikh & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 166
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution with costs of ₹50,000, holding that the petitioners had approached the Court with tainted hands by suppressing material facts, including the fact that the trial court had already stayed the execution of the impugned order at their own instance. The Court reiterated that the writ jurisdiction cannot be permitted to be invoked as an instrument of abuse or to perpetuate unfair advantage.
Case Title: Sanjay Kumar & Anr. Vs Mohan Singh & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 167
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reminded trial courts that the propriety of judicial conduct and temper in addressing the Bar is a non-negotiable aspect of judicial grace, particularly when senior advocates with long-standing experience and due sense of responsibility are representing litigants. The Court observed that a court is supposed to moderate its tone and tenor when dealing with such members of the Bar.
Case Title: Ahsan ul Haq Khanday v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 168
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh upheld a preventive detention order under the Public Safety Act, 1978, holding that continued involvement of the detenue as an Over Ground Worker (OGW) for terrorist outfits, including The Resistance Front (TRF), coupled with communication with a Pakistani handler through Dark Web applications, demonstrates a sustained threat to the security of the Union Territory and renders the plea of stale grounds untenable.
Case Title: UT of J&K v. Sameer Ahmad Khan & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 169
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a recruitment process cannot be scrapped solely on the ground of non-issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP) or Expression of Interest (EOI) in the engagement of an examination-conducting agency, particularly when the process has reached an advanced stage, and no irregularity is alleged in the conduct of the examination.
Case Title: UT of J&K & Ors. Vs Sara Begum
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 170
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a right accrued to a deceased employee cannot be taken away retrospectively, and the repeal of an Act or Rule cannot be applied to defeat a right that had crystallized under the repealed Act, more so when such action amounts to violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
Case Title: Deepak Singh & Ors Vs UT of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 171
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the conviction of co-accused cannot be sustained merely on account of their association with the principal accused, especially when the testimony of alleged eye-witnesses suffers from unexplained delay in recording, material contradictions with medical evidence, and the witnesses themselves admit that the principal witness was not present at the scene.
Case Title: Aqib Ahmad Vs UT of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 172
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a supplementary chargesheet that introduced offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Violence Ordinance, 2018 (POCSV) after a lapse of five years, holding that the power of further investigation cannot be used to fundamentally alter the nature of the prosecution case from an "attempt" to a "completed act" based solely on a materially improved statement of the victim that stands in stark contradiction to contemporaneous medical evidence.
Case Title: Mehraj Din Malik (through father Shamas Din) v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 173
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed the preventive detention of Mehraj Din Malik, a Member of Legislative Assembly from Doda East, holding that the invocation of the Public Safety Act, 1978 (PSA) was based on allegations that at best amounted to 'law and order' issues and did not satisfy the threshold of 'public order'.
Case Title: Mohd. Kabir v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 174
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that though preventive detention under the Public Safety Act can be invoked even when proceedings under Section 129 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 are ongoing, such detention must satisfy strict legal standards, failing which it would be rendered unlawful.
Case Title: Altaf Ahmad Waza v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 175
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a preventive detention order cannot be sustained where the respondents fail to substantiate the medical grounds relied upon to justify non-execution of the detention warrant, and where there is unexplained delay in its execution.
Case Title: Yawar Ahmad Bhagat v. UT of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 176
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the mere entry regarding date of birth in a school admission register or a certificate issued on its basis does not conclusively establish the age of a person. The Court added that the correctness of such particulars depends entirely on the basis on which the entry was made, and in the absence of evidence showing the source of the information, the certificate has no probative value.
Case Title: Riyaz Ahmad Wani Vs Abdul Hamid Dar
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 177
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that it is day in and day out coming across cases where parties seek to challenge awards passed by Lok Adalats, and that this growing tendency leads to unnecessary invocation of writ jurisdiction and waste of valuable judicial time which ought to be devoted to genuine matters.
Case Title: Inhabitants of Village Pariswani Vs UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 178
The Court held that extraction of sand, gravel, stones and boulders from riverbeds and nallahs may appear insignificant but their cumulative impact is often severe, and such activities cannot be left to unchecked private exploitation and must operate only within a strict statutory and environmental framework.
Case Title: State Bank of India Vs Smt. Balbir Kaur
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 179
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a major daughter who is physically crippled and unable to earn a living is eligible for family pension under Rule 23(i) of the State Bank of India Employees Pension Fund Rules, even if her name was not specifically indicated in the declaration form submitted by the deceased employee at the time of retirement. The Court added that a hyper-technical approach by the Bank in denying such benefit cannot be sustained.
Case Title: XXX v. Afaq Ali Khan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 180
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court set aside a regular bail order passed by a trial court in a case registered under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that the impugned order was cryptic, bereft of reasons, and failed to advert to material aspects including the victim's statement under Section 164 BNSS and allegations of inducement on the false promise of marriage.
Case Title: Abdul Ahad Dar v. Mohammad Sidiq Dar
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 181
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a defence alleging that cheques were issued under coercion in police custody cannot be established through forensic examination of the cheques, and must instead be proved by producing witnesses.
Case Title: Bashir Ahmad Bhat Vs UT of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 182
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that in cases where an accused has been convicted of an offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 involving commercial quantity of contraband, the stringent conditions laid down in Section 37 of the Act cannot be diluted merely on the ground of long incarceration, and that the recording of satisfaction on the twin conditions is a jurisdictional requirement and not a mere formality.
Case Title: Nazir Ahmad Mir & Ors Vs Ishfaq Ahmad Mir
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 183
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that when the status of the suit property as to whether it is a joint holding or stood partitioned becomes a triable issue, the plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Case Title: Union Territory of J&K & Ors. v. Ravinder Kanta & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 184
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the Government cannot selectively choose which judgments to accept and which to challenge after a prolonged period, reiterating that once a legal position has attained finality and held the field for years, it must remain undisturbed in the interest of judicial discipline and certainty.
Case Title: M. Naseer U Zaman Vs Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh Financial Corporation & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 185
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that in cases of deputation to a corporation, company or autonomous body, the borrowing organization is obligated to calculate and release the leave salary due to the employee and may thereafter seek reimbursement from the parent organization.
No Conflict Between J&K Development Act & Panchayati Raj Act On Building Regulation: High Court
Case Title: Inhabitants of Block Harwan v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 186
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the J&K Development Act, 1970, and the J&K Panchayati Raj Act, 1989, do not conflict insofar as regulation of building permissions and their violations are concerned.
The Court ruled that if an area is part of a Notified Area for which the J&K Lakes Conservation and Management Authority (LCMA) has been constituted, LCMA alone has jurisdiction to grant building permissions and ensure that no construction takes place without such permissions or in violation thereof.
Case Title: Abdul Rashid Kohli v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 187
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that mere call detail records showing contact between an accused and a co-accused are not sufficient to establish a nexus with drug trafficking, especially in the absence of voice recordings or transcripts of the conversation, and that call logs alone cannot prove a criminal conspiracy for sale or transportation of drugs.
Case Title: Aijaz Hussain Sahaf v. State of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 188
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that the High Court cannot interfere under its inherent jurisdiction to quash an FIR merely because a preliminary verification had earlier recommended closure, when subsequent material collected during inquiry discloses the commission of a cognizable offence.
Case Title: Tabassum Qadir Parray & Ors. v. High Court of Jammu and Kashmir & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 189
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by four judicial officers who sought quashing of a seniority list of Munsiffs issued in 2011 and a direction to fix their seniority on the basis of their inter se merit in the selection process conducted by the Public Service Commission.
Case Title: Farooq Ahmad v. Habib Ul-Ilah Bhat & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 190
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an unregistered agreement to sell, though inadmissible to prove title, can be relied upon for collateral purposes, including for determining the nature and character of possession at the stage of consideration of an application for temporary injunction.
Case Title: Ali Mohd. Dar v. State of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 191
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure even after an award has attained finality, to correct an inadvertent error resulting in excess payment and to prevent unjust enrichment.
Case Title: Chairman J&K Board of School Education v. Syed Abdul Rouf & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 192
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an employee appointed on deputation is entitled to elect to draw either the pay in the scale of the deputation post or the basic pay in the pay scale of the parent cadre plus personal pay, if any.
Disclosure Statement Of Co-Accused Alone Insufficient To Deny Bail Under UAPA: J&K&L High Court
Case Title: Burhan Ahmad Mattoo v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 193
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted bail to an accused charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, holding that where the only material against the appellant is in the form of a disclosure statement made by a co-accused, the appellant has successfully crossed the hurdle of Section 43-D(5) of the Act.
Case Title: Radha Krishen Koul & Anr. v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 194
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court set aside a writ court order that had dismissed the petitions of two leaseholders on grounds of suppression of facts and abuse of process, directing the respondents to confer proprietary rights upon them under the Government Order of 1981.
Case Title: Vilayat Aziz Mir v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 195
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by an 18-year-old detenue held under the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978, holding that his age cannot be treated as a ground for leniency when his alleged activities pose a potential risk to the security of the Union Territory.
Cause Title: Mohammad Ashraf Sheikh Vs Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 196
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that preventive measures, even if they involve some restraint or hardship upon individuals, do not partake of the nature of punishment. The Court ruled that the object of preventive detention is not to punish a man for having done something but to intercept and prevent him from doing so, and that those responsible for national security or maintenance of public order must be the sole judges of what such security or order requires.
Case Title: Darshan Singh @ Deepu v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 197
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that where a detenue was implicated in FIRs involving alleged recovery of small quantities of heroin and both cases were still under investigation, the detaining authority could not conclude that the detenue was engaged in “continuous illegal activities of drug peddling” to justify preventive detention under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988.
Case Title: Manish Kumar Bharti v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 198
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that filing of repeated representations to the department cannot cure delay and laches in filing a writ petition, and that a reply rejecting such a representation does not furnish a fresh cause of action or revive a stale or dead claim.
Case Title: Aultaf Ahmad Shah v. J&K Bank Ltd. & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 199
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that where a disciplinary authority directs that the period of suspension undergone by an employee would qualify for leave, increments and retirement benefits, such period must necessarily count towards the employee's regular service as well.
Case Title: Rouf Ahmad Mir & Ors Vs Adfara Rahman
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 200
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that at the time of considering an application under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the standard of proof is only prima facie satisfaction of the Court regarding the existence of a domestic relationship and the likelihood of domestic violence, and a meticulous analysis of the evidence on record has to be avoided at this stage.
Case Title: Basharat Ahmad Abbasi Alias Bashir And Another v. UT of J&K And Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 201
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a dying declaration recorded on a mobile phone minutes before the death of the deceased, which has been forensically certified as unedited, constitutes substantial admissible evidence under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act, and minor contradictions in such a statement cannot be critically analyzed at the stage of considering a bail application.
Case Title: Jahangir Ahmad Parray v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 202
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that repeated preventive arrests of a detenu under Section 107 read with 151 CrPC after his release on bail in Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act cases constitutes fresh and proximate material for the detaining authority to pass an order of preventive detention under the Public Safety Act, and such grounds cannot be dismissed as stale merely because the original UAPA cases are old.
Case Title: Mohammad Amin Rather And Others v. UT of J&K And Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 203
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution is confined to examining the decision-making process and not the decision itself.
The Court emphasised that courts must refrain from issuing directions for permanent absorption or regularization when there exists a blanket ban on engagements imposed by the Government and over 3,000 seasonal labourers are working under similar conditions, as such a direction would amount to transgressing into the domain of executive policy.
Case Title: Shagun Chandel (wife of detenu Nisar Ahmad) v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 204
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that preventive detention under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (PITNDPS) cannot be ordered by mechanically relying on pending FIRs in which the detenu has already been granted bail, especially when no commercial quantity of narcotics was recovered from the detenu and there is no allegation of violation of bail conditions.
Case Title: Syed Irfan Ahmad v. NIA Jammu
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 205
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh dismissed the bail appeal of an accused alleged to have acted as an intermediary between Hizbul Mujahideen militants and a police officer, facilitating the safe movement of militants from Shopian to Jammu for exfiltration to Pakistan and transferring funds for arms and ammunition, holding that the prima facie material collected during investigation must prevail at the bail stage under the stringent provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
Case Title: Mushtaq Ahmad Malik v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 206
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that Rule 147-A of the Army Rules, 1954, which permits the Central Government to deny a certified copy of court-martial proceedings on grounds of security of the State or friendly relations with foreign States, is constitutionally valid and protected by Article 33 of the Constitution of India.
Corrigendum Clarifying Tribunal's Original Order Cannot Create New Cause Of Action: J&K&L High Court
Case Title: Hajira v. J&K Special Tribunal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 207
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a corrigendum issued by a Tribunal on its own without any formal application, bearing the same date as the main order, does not create a fresh cause of action for a writ petition when it is purely clarificatory in nature and does not effect any substantial modification in the operative portion of the original order.
Case Title: Pushap Kumar Tickoo & Ors. v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 208
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh dismissed a petition filed by four former senior executives of the Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. seeking quashing of an FIR registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120-B RPC in connection with an alleged insurance deal between the Bank and M/S IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Ltd.
Case Title: Dr. Abdul Majeed Bhat v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 209
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh granted bail to a doctor accused of attempting to rape a woman who had approached him for treatment, reiterating that in non-bailable offences not attracting the statutory embargo under Section 480 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, bail is the rule and jail is the exception.
Case Title: Tanveer Ahmad Mir v. Union Territory of J&K and Another
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 210
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that merely because certain factual recitals in the grounds of detention resemble portions of the police dossier, the detention order cannot be quashed unless the Court finds that the detaining authority acted mechanically and failed to independently apply its mind to the material before it.
Case Title: Rajinder Singh v. Home Secretary to Govt. of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 211
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that Rule 27(d) of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955, which empowers the disciplinary authority to conduct common proceedings against two or more members of the Force, is merely a directory provision.
Case Title: Tanveer Ahmad Mir v. UT of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 212
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the adaptation of the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 after the enactment of the Jammu & Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 was carried out strictly within the statutory authority conferred by Parliament and does not suffer from any constitutional infirmity.
Case Title: Vishvendra Singh v. UT of J&K & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 213
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the facts of the same occurrence cannot be allowed to be broken into pieces so as to file multiple complaints, and that all offences arising out of the same occurrence are to be investigated and tried together as per the scheme of criminal law.
Case Title: Mohammad Yousuf Allie v. High Court of J&K and Ladakh & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 214
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh dismissed an application seeking condonation of 502 days' delay in filing a review petition against a judgment that upheld the termination of a Judicial Officer who had secured appointment as Munsiff (Judicial Magistrate) 1st Class on the basis of a fabricated RBA certificate.
Case Title: Mohammad Latief Dar v. UT of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 215
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the Government is vested with supervisory and control powers over a Cooperative Credit Structure Society under Section 32A of the Jammu and Kashmir Cooperative Societies Act, 1989 and, in that capacity, can make an interim arrangement for discharging the functions of the Managing Director.
Case Title: Rayees Ahmad Lone v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 216
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a preventive detention order passed under the Public Safety Act, holding that since the Shri Amarnathji Yatra period for which the detention was purportedly ordered had already concluded, the very reason for keeping the detenue in preventive custody had vanished.
Case Title: Nazira Begum v. Union Territory of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 217
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the existence of a structure raised by the purchaser in good faith on land proposed to be purchased from a migrant owner cannot, by itself, be a ground to indefinitely withhold registration of the sale deed if the structure does not belong to the vendor.
Case Title: Majid Yaqub Dar v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 218
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed an FIR registered against an ex-Ranji Trophy player Majid Dar alleging production of a false date of birth certificate, holding that criminal law cannot be permitted to be used as an instrument of harassment or for settling internal disputes of an institution.
Case Title: Rakesh Kumar v. UT of J&K and Another
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 219
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted anticipatory bail to an Army personnel accused in a case involving allegations under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, after the prosecutrix stated that she was in a consensual relationship with him, had married him after attaining majority, and did not wish to pursue the case.
Case Title: Minor Victim “X” Through Her Father v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 220
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh declined permission for medical termination of a 27-week pregnancy of a minor rape survivor, holding that preservation and protection of life must take precedence where medical experts warn that termination would expose the victim to life-threatening complications and irreversible health consequences.
Case Title: Imtiyaz Qadir Bhat & Anr. v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 221
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed an appeal against rejection of bail in a case registered under Section 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, arising from allegations that a society operating in Baramulla was collecting funds through donation boxes and diverting them for promoting secessionist ideology.
Case Title: Pir Mohd Ishaq & Ors. v. University of Kashmir & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 222
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a batch of writ petitions filed by three Junior Engineers who had been engaged by the University of Kashmir on a “Hire and Fire” basis on consolidated wages for over nine years, seeking quashing of a fresh advertisement notification for regular recruitment and directions for regularisation of their services.
Cattle Smuggling Cases Do Not Warrant Preventive Detention: J&K&L High Court
Case Title: Reham Ali v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 223
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a preventive detention order passed under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 against a person accused in multiple FIRs relating to transportation of cattle/bovine and offences under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
Case Title: S.D. Mevada & Anr. v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir through Food Safety Officer, Block Shopian
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 224
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh refused to quash criminal proceedings initiated against officials of Banaskantha District Cooperative Milk Producers' Union Ltd. (Amul), holding that the report of a Referral Laboratory declaring a milk sample unsafe overrides an earlier report of the Food Analyst and constitutes sufficient material for prosecution under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
Case Title: UT of J&K & Ors. v. Khalid Jehangir Bhat & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 225
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court allowed a review petition filed by the Union Territory of J&K, recalling its earlier judgment in terms of which it had quashed land acquisition proceedings initiated for the Islamic University of Science and Technology, Awantipora.
Case Title: G.M. Sheikh v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 226
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a history sheet opened against a person and directed removal of his name from Surveillance Register holding that the subjective satisfaction required for declaring a person a history-sheeter must rest upon reasonable belief founded on objective and verifiable material, and that no such satisfaction was recorded in the present case.
Case Title: Fariz Gulzar (through father) v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 227
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a preventive detention order passed under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 against a juvenile who was 16 years old at the time of the alleged activities, holding that the scheme of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 excludes the application of punitive or preventive detention mechanisms meant for adults.
UAPA Trials Cannot Linger Endlessly, Day-To-Day Hearing Mandated U/S 19 NIA Act: J&K&L High Court
Case Title: Arif Billa Sheikh v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 228
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh directed a Special Court to accord priority to a trial arising out of offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, observing that Parliament, through Section 19 of the National Investigation Agency Act, has specifically mandated day-to-day trials in such cases to ensure that prosecutions involving serious offences do not linger indefinitely.
Case Title: Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. & Ors. v. Naseer Ahmad Sheikh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 229
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that disciplinary proceedings initiated against a bank employee during service can lawfully continue after his retirement and culminate in an order of dismissal if the governing service regulations so permit.
Case Title: Bashir Ahmad Akhoon & Anr. v. Ghulam Ahmad Malik
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 230
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the appointment of a Commissioner does not amount to adjudication of title or determination of possession and is merely a procedural mechanism intended to assist the court in resolving disputed factual issues.
Case Title: Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. & Ors. v. Tanu Gupta & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 231
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed intra-court appeals filed by the Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. against a single bench judgment directing the Bank to treat maternity leave period as continuous service for regularisation of female Banking Associates.
Case Title: Pawan Kumar @Raja v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 232
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court refused to quash an FIR registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act against a petitioner, even though a DNA report excluded him as the biological father of the child born to the minor victim.
Case Title: Sohan Singh & Ors. v. Chuni Lal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 233
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a civil suit seeking permanent prohibitory injunction to protect possession over land remains maintainable before a civil court notwithstanding the provisions of the Jammu & Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976, observing that the omission of Section 19(3) from the statute has substantially altered the legal position governing jurisdictional objections in such matters.
Case Title: Rameez Ahmed v. Union of India through Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau, Jammu
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 234
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that infractions relating to Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 cannot, by themselves, nullify a prosecution under the NDPS Act, observing that the provision is intended primarily for safe disposal of seized narcotic substances and that procedural lapses must be assessed in the context of the overall evidence available on record.
Selected Candidate's Removal Over Fake Certificate Won't Revive Waiting List: J&K&L High Court
Case Title: Bisma Bashir v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 235
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking direction to operate the waiting list for the post of Messieurs (female) after the initially selected candidate was disengaged on account of her 12th pass qualification certificate being found to have been issued by an unrecognized institution.
Case Title: Umar Nazir Bhat v. UT of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 236
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that allegations relating to a person's involvement in enforcing hartal and bandh calls in Kashmir cannot justify preventive detention years later in the absence of any proximate material linking such activities to the detention order.
Case Title: State of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors. v. Ghulam Mohd. Tantray
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 237
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh upheld the dismissal of a police constable who was found involved in anti-national activities, observing that the enemy had been using multiple tools and strategies to disintegrate the nation by infiltrating the Government through its employees and members of the security forces.
Case Title: Bittu Ram v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 238
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh quashed a preventive detention order passed under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978, observing that an ordinary citizen is not supposed to know the full form or meaning of the abbreviation 'BNSS' unless law enforcement agencies and the concerned magistrate disclose it.
Case Title: Riyaz Ahmad Hajam & Anr. v. Union Territory through SHO Police Station Uri District Baramulla
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 239
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, though both special enactments, operate in distinct legislative fields and are required to be harmoniously construed.
Case Title: State of J&K Through Senior Superintendent of Police, Kathua v. Balwinder Kumar Alias Bittu
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 240
Holding that an ante-dated First Information Report casts serious doubt on the genuineness and spontaneity of the prosecution case and renders the ensuing investigation tainted, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh upheld the acquittal of a man accused of murder.
Case Title: Union Territory of J&K & Ors. v. Fayaz Ahmad Bhat & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 241
Reiterating that employees performing identical duties cannot be paid differently merely because their remuneration originates from different sources, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh upheld the entitlement of Vocational Instructors engaged under the Self-Finance Scheme in Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs) to enhanced remuneration under an Government Order.
Case Title: Ali Mohammad Dar v. Union Territory of J&K & Anr. connected with Muzamilla v. State (UT of J&K)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 242
Holding that a prosecution case becomes seriously suspect when witnesses are already informed by the police about the identity of the alleged offenders before their statements are recorded, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh set aside the conviction of two persons sentenced to life imprisonment for murder.
Case Title: Kewal Sharma v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 243
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted bail to an accused facing trial under Sections 302 and 201 RPC after observing that the prosecution had consumed more than eleven years to examine only twenty-four witnesses and had failed to conclude evidence despite repeated opportunities.
Case Title: Maqbool Buhroo and Others v. Ahad Buhroo and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 244
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that merely mentioning the word “dead” against the name of a deceased respondent in a small font, without specifying the date of death, does not amount to compliance with the obligation cast upon counsel under Rule 10-A of Order XXII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Case Title: S.D. Mevada & Anr. v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir Through Food Safety Officer, Block Shopian
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 245
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that where a Designated Officer records reasons showing that an initial food analysis report is incomplete or erroneous due to omission of crucial safety parameters, the sample can validly be referred to a Referral Laboratory under Rule 2.4.3 of the Food Safety and Standards Rules, 2011, and no prior hearing to the food business operator is required before such referral.
Case Title: Assadullah Wagay and Others v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 246
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed an FIR and all consequential proceedings against few persons who were charged under Sections 447 and 186 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 18 of the J&K State Evacuees (Administration of Property) Act, Svt. 2006, holding that the Trial Court had no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the said offences on the basis of a police report in the absence of a written complaint by the competent authority.
Case Title: Union of India & Ors. v. Ex NK Roshan Lal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 247
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld an order of the Armed Forces Tribunal granting disability element of pension to Army personnel after observing that the disability had developed during service after more than fourteen years of enrolment and that the subsequent denial of attributability lacked adequate reasoning.
Case Title: Ghulam Rasool Rather & Ors. v. Financial Commissioner Revenue & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 248
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh quashed an order passed by the Financial Commissioner (Revenue) setting aside a mutation attested in the year 2004, holding that the revision petition filed in 2021 after a lapse of nearly twenty years was barred by unreasonable delay.
Case Title: State of J&K Through Police Station Gangyal v. Mohd. Irfan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 249
Holding that mere assertion that an accused opted to be searched before a Gazetted Officer does not by itself establish compliance with Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh observed that the prosecution must further prove through consistent and reliable evidence that the search was actually conducted before or by such officer.
Case Title: UT of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors. v. Mohd. Shafi Yatoo & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 250
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh set aside a writ Court order directing payment of remuneration to contractual professionals engaged for preparation of zonal plans, holding that the respondents miserably failed to demonstrate that they performed any duties beyond the period of their contract.
Case Title: Mohammad Ameen War v. State of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 251
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh dismissed a writ petition challenging a revised building permission order issued by the Srinagar Municipal Corporation regularizing alleged deviations in construction, holding that the High Court does not have any mechanism or yardstick to conduct a roving enquiry into the question whether a deviation is minor or major in nature.
Case Title: Kamran Mushtaq v. UT of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 252
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh set aside an order cancelling bail granted to an accused facing trial under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, holding that the concept of “financing illicit traffic” under Section 27-A is distinct from merely receiving consideration for the sale of narcotic substances.
Case Title: Yawar Ahmad Bhagat v. UT of J&K through P/S Yaripora
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 253
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh set aside the conviction of a man under Section 376 of the Ranbir Penal Code for alleged statutory rape, holding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the prosecutrix was a minor on the date of the occurrence.
Case Title: Makhan Din v. Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 254
Holding that preventive detention cannot be sustained where the detaining authority is kept unaware that the prosecution had already failed in its attempt to secure cancellation of the detenue's bail, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh observed that a situation where cancellation of bail does not succeed but the person is thereafter subjected to preventive detention custody is “antithetical” in nature.
Case Title: Mohd. Sultan Dar & Ors. v. UT of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 255
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that kahcharai land, being State-owned land reserved for common and community use, does not confer any individual proprietary interest, and compensation for its acquisition is payable to the concerned Panchayat for the welfare of the local community, not to private individuals.
Case Title: Harsh Dev Singh v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 256
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure which is contrary to the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 cannot be made applicable to the trial of election petitions.
Case Title:Principal, Woodland House School & Ors. v. Shakeel Ahmad Malik
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 257
Addressing the growing use of Artificial Intelligence in the judicial system, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh cautioned judicial officers against relying upon AI-generated legal material without independent verification, observing that while artificial intelligence tools may assist legal research, they cannot substitute judicial scrutiny, verification and application of mind.
Case Title: Khalid Fayaz Ahanger & Ors. v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 258
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh partly allowed a petition challenging framing of charges under Sections 306 and 107 of the Indian Penal Code in a case of alleged abetment of suicide.
The Court thus upheld the framing of charges against the boyfriend (petitioner No.1) who was in a five-year relationship with the deceased, observing that the material disclosed not just a failed romance but a pattern of humiliation, derogatory treatment, and callous indifference.
Case Title: Union Territory of J&K Through Police Station Sumbal v. Parvaiz Ahmed Ganie
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 259
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that granting bail in rape cases at the very inception of trial has a chilling effect on the safety of women and that courts must remain mindful of the gravity and societal impact of such offences while considering bail applications.
Case Title: J&K Private Schools United Front v. Union Territory of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 260
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal filed by a trust representing private schools challenging notifications issued by the Jammu and Kashmir Board of School Education mandating that all private schools across the Union Territory adopt and teach only those textbooks published by the Board for Classes VI to VIII.
Case Title: Manzoor Ahmad Bhat v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 261
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a contractual employee engaged under the Ex-Servicemen Contributory Health Scheme (ECHS) cannot claim the constitutional protection available to holders of civil posts under Article 311 of the Constitution.
Individual Landowners Cannot Claim Compensation From State For Overhead Lines: J&K&L High Court
Case Title: Ghulam Mohi Uddin Sheikh v. Union Territory of J&K and others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 262
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal challenging the dismissal of a writ petition seeking compensation for land affected by 220 KV transmission lines, holding that the aerial right of way for transmission lines remains with the State and individual landowners cannot claim compensation in respect thereof, except for the land on which towers are erected.
Case Title: Peerzada Mohammad Syed v. State (Now UT) of Jammu & Kashmir and Other
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 263
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that encroached Kahcharai land cannot now be exchanged against proprietary land under the amended legal framework and that courts cannot issue a writ directing authorities to consider such exchange requests in the absence of statutory backing.
Case Title: Angrez Singh Through His Attorney Ashok Kumar & Anr. v. Inspector General Registration, Jammu & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 264
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a Sub Registrar functioning under the Registration Act, 1908, can either register the document or refuse registration in accordance with law, and cannot indefinitely defer decision-making by seeking administrative clarifications from superior authorities.
Case Title: Ibrar Bashir Shirazi v. University of Kashmir
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 265
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed an intra-court appeal filed by a Doctor of Medicine postgraduate seeking a direction to the University of Kashmir to provide him a Gold Medal, holding that the writ petition was barred by delay and laches as the cause of action allegedly arose in the year 2014 while the petition was filed only in 2023, and the appellant had taken inconsistent stands regarding the factual matrix of his claim.
Case Title: Vishwa Bharati Women's Welfare Institution v. Amina Naseem and others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 266
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that unless the admissions made by a defendant in its pleadings or otherwise are clear, categorical and unequivocal, a court cannot proceed to pass a decree under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Case Title: Farooq Ahmad Dar v. UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 267
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the filing of a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the prosecutrix seeking quashment of an FIR alleging offences under Sections 376 and 506 IPC cannot, at the stage of consideration of bail, dilute the seriousness of the allegations levelled against the accused.
Case Title: Shahnawaz Amin Shah v. UT of J&K and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 268
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that although consent of a prosecutrix is legally irrelevant in offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, cases involving romantic relationships between young adults where there may have been “tacit approval in fact, though not consent in law” for a sexual relationship are required to be viewed with less severity while considering bail.
Case Title: Talib Hussain v. UT of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 269
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that detention orders passed under preventive detention laws merely by reproducing allegations contained in dossiers supplied by sponsoring authorities, without independent application of mind by the detaining authority, are illegal and unconstitutional.
Case Title: Abdul Aziz Mir v. Tariq Ahmad Mir
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 270
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that an unregistered “Tahrirnama” cannot be relied upon to prove transfer of immovable property situated in Kashmir and that even possession of such property cannot lawfully be taken over unless the transfer is effected through a valid registered instrument.
Case Title: Shahid Mehraj v. Union Territory of J&K and others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 271
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High High Court held that employees engaged on daily wage basis cannot claim parity with those employees who were serving on regular or permanent basis for the purpose of deployment to other government departments after winding up of the company.
Case Title: Mohammed Ashraf Mir v. Wazir Reshi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 272
Ruling on the evolving contours of Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that while interim compensation under Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not to be granted mechanically, the conduct of the accused, including repeated defaults in appearance, the likelihood of delaying the trial, and circumstances indicating a possibility of evading proceedings, are relevant considerations while exercising discretion under the provision.
FCI Can Recover Amounts For Delay In Completing Black-Topping Of PEG Godown Roads: J&K&L High Court
Case Title: M/S Alpine Agro Services v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 273
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that black-topping of internal roads forms an essential component of the infrastructure required under the Private Entrepreneur Guarantee (PEG) Scheme and that recoveries effected by the Food Corporation of India (FCI) for failure to complete such work within the stipulated period cannot be faulted merely because the godown continued to remain operational.
Case Title: Vikar Mustafa Shonthu v. Union Territory of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 274
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that although an employer possesses the power to recover from the pension or retiral benefits of a retired employee amounts representing losses caused by negligence or fraud during service, such recovery can be effected only in accordance with the conditions stipulated under Article 168-A of the Jammu & Kashmir Civil Service Regulations (CSR).
Case Title: Manga Ram v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 275
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that when a post-mortem report states that death was caused by “Recurrent acute on chronic SDH with complications” and links it to the assault, the assault must be treated as the root cause of death at the stage of framing charges.
Mst. Jana (Dead) Through LRs v. Assadullah Raina & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 276
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that Muslim Personal Law in India is confined to matters relating to marriage and inheritance and cannot be invoked to assert a right of prior purchase or pre-emption in relation to immovable property transactions.
Case Title: Showkat Ahmad Seer v. Union Territory of J&K Through Police Station Qalamabad
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 277
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that where medical evidence does not support the allegation of penetrative sexual assault, the testimony of the prosecutrix requires careful scrutiny and cannot be accepted as conclusive proof of rape merely because she is the victim of the offence.
Case Title: State (Now Union Territory) of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors. v. Raghu Singh Jandla
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 278
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that where a candidate is wrongfully denied appointment due to an error attributable to the appointing authority, the State cannot subsequently rely upon the delayed appointment to deny benefits that were available to similarly situated selectees at the relevant time.
Case Title: Mohammad Iqbal Wani v. UT of J&K & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 279
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that economic offences cannot be placed in a separate category for the purpose of automatically denying bail and that the mere fact that an accused is facing a charge punishable with life imprisonment does not disentitle him from seeking release on bail.
Case Title: Nazir Ahmad Mir & Ors. v. Ishfaq Ahmad Mir & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 280
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that where a party specifically pleads that a property was partitioned privately pursuant to an arbitral award, the question whether such partition actually took place becomes a triable issue and cannot be decided while considering an application for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Case Title: Union Territory of J&K v. Parvaiz Ahmed Ganie
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 281
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that merely because no sperm was detected on the seized trousers of the victim in a rape case, her statement would not be rendered unreliable if it is otherwise of sterling quality.
Case Title: Mohd. Kabir v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 282
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that where a person is already facing preventive proceedings under Section 129 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the detaining authority must specifically record compelling reasons demonstrating why those proceedings are inadequate to prevent the individual from engaging in activities prejudicial to public order before invoking preventive detention under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (PIT-NDPS Act).
Case Title:Kanchan Devi v. Amit Sharma
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 283
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that courts dealing with matrimonial petitions under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 are required to undertake a reconciliation exercise at the first instance as mandated under Section 23(2) of the Act and in the spirit of Order 32-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and cannot proceed to insist upon filing of replies/objections without first probing the scope for an amicable settlement.
Case Title: Atiqa Begum & Ors. v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 284
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a reference to the Principal Civil Court under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956, is not mandatory merely because a third party raises a dispute regarding title to acquired land.
Case Title: Afroz Ahmed Sheikh v. Narcotics Control Bureau, Jammu Zone
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 285
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a trial court cannot mechanically defer the conclusion of an NDPS trial merely because a supplementary complaint has subsequently been filed against a co-accused.
Case Title: M. Naseer U Zaman v. Managing Director J&K and Ladakh Financial Corporation & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 286
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that where an employee serves on deputation with a corporation, company or autonomous body, the borrowing organisation is required to assess and release the leave salary due to the employee and can thereafter seek reimbursement from the parent department in accordance with the Jammu & Kashmir Civil Service Regulations (CSR).