Nominal Index:Tabinda Nazir v. Union Territory through Police Station Baramulla 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 423Nusrat Jan And Another v. Union Territory of J&K (Home) And Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 424Ali Hussain Shah v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 425Anwar Jan (Choudhary) v. Union Territory of J&K & Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 426Minor Victim (X) Through Her...
Nominal Index:
Tabinda Nazir v. Union Territory through Police Station Baramulla 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 423
Nusrat Jan And Another v. Union Territory of J&K (Home) And Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 424
Ali Hussain Shah v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 425
Anwar Jan (Choudhary) v. Union Territory of J&K & Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 426
Minor Victim (X) Through Her Natural Guardian/Mother v. Union Territory of Ladakh 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 427
State of Jammu & Kashmir through Commissioner/Secretary to Government, General Administration Department v. Ghulam Mohammad Lone 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 428
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jan Begum & Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 429
Mrs. Kareena Jamwal (Alias Zulikha Hussain) v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 430
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Radha Devi & Others / National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sham Lal & Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 431
Mohammad Ashraf Ganie v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 432
Nisar Ahmad Bhat v. Rafia Jan 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 433
M/s Incredible Placement Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 434
Anoop Dutta v. Union Territory of J&K and Others, along with connected matters 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 435
Israr Manzoor v. Takdis Alyas @ Takids Alyas 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 436
Khursheed Ahmad Khan v. Union of India & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 437
Haleema and Another v. State of Jammu and Kashmir and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 438
Nazir Ahmad Mir v. Union of India & Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 439
Ashok Singh Manhas v. Union of India & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 440
Sheikh Rafiq Ahmad and Another v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 441
Mangat Ram v. Shano Devi 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 442
Col. R.S. Parmar (Retd.) v. Union of India & Others; AFCONS Infrastructure Limited v. Union of India & Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 443
Union Territory of J&K v. Shabir Ahmad Dar 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 444
M/s Kashmir Confectionary Store & Others v. M/s Mother Choice Health Care India 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 445
Mohi Ud Din v. Union of India & Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 446
Din Mohd Wani v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 447
Mohammad Shafi Lone and Bilal Ahmad Dar v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 448
Manhar Gupta and Others v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 449
Qadeer-Ul-Rehman and Another v. State of J&K and Another 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 450
Ankush Sharma Vs UT of J&K LiveLaw article 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 451
Kaiser Hameed Beigh v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 452
Devinder Singh and Others v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 453
Khayal Shafi Badana v. Union Territory Through Police Station Rajbagh 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 454
Tara Chand and Another v. Bhagat Ram 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 455
Farhat Ali Khanday v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 456
Sheikh Mohammad Yaseen v. Ali Mohammad Shora 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 257
Bashir Ahmed v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 458
Mohammad Sultan Bhat v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 459
Commissioner Secretary, PMGSY & Others v. Mohd. Iqbal 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 460
Mst. Sakeena Banoo v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 461
X v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 462
Case Title: UT of J&K Vs Neeru Pandita 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 463
Mushtaq Ahmad Rafiqee v. Mohammad Amin Wani & Another 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 464
Gurpartap Singh v. National Investigation Agency 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 465
Union of India v. Babu Ram 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 466
Brij Lal and Others v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 467
Abdul Rashid and Another v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 468
Union Territory of J&K v. Nissar Ahmad and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 469
Sheeri Pal Singh v. Central Bureau of Investigation 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 470
Raj Sharma (Bharti) v. Collector Land Acquisition and Another 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 471
Rajat Kumar v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 472
Renu Mahajan v. Achal Sethi 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 473
Jaydeep Singh Jadeja v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 474
Union Territory of J&K v. Harmeet Singh and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 475
Dr. Saima Kabir v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 476
Tariq Ahmad Dar v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 477
Rouf Ahmad Wani v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 478
Jahangir Iqbal Ganai v. Md Amin Dar and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 479
Riaz and Others v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 480
Union Territory of J&K and Others v. Mehmooda Shaheen Medical Trust Hospital 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 481
Hamid Hussain v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 482
Tariq Ahmad Dar v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 483
Mst. Themud v. Ram Nath & Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 484
Mangat Ram v. Shano Devi 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 485
Bansi Lal Bhardwaj v. S. Gagandeep Singh 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 486
Villagers of Chutuk and Others v. Mohammad Hussain 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 487
Ikram Tahir v. Union Territory of J&K 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 488
Javed Ahmad Bhat v. Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 489
Abdul Rehman Wagay Gawgojree v. Nazir Ahmad Wagay & Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 490
Mushtaq Ahmad v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 491
X X X X v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 492
Vivek Bassan v. Central Bureau of Investigation 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 493
M/s Mass N Energy and Others v. Union of India and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 494
Shakoor Ahmed v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 495
Shanaza Banoo v. Union Territory of J&K and Others 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 496
Ghulam Mohammad Dhobi v. Abdul Hamid Malla 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 497
Judgments/Orders:
Case Title: Tabinda Nazir v. Union Territory through Police Station Baramulla
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 423
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh transferred to the Crime Branch the investigation into an alleged conspiracy involving fabrication of judicial records in Baramulla and directed constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), observing that the allegations had serious ramifications for the judicial delivery system.
Case Title: Nusrat Jan And Another v. Union Territory of J&K (Home) And Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 424
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh directed police protection to an adult woman and the man of her choice, holding that her voluntary decision regarding her life and association cannot be overridden merely because of parental disagreement or societal expectations.
Case Title: Ali Hussain Shah v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 425
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh granted bail to an MTS official accused in an alleged ₹1.38-crore treasury embezzlement case, holding that the statutory bar under Section 480 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 was not attracted in the circumstances of the case.
Case Title: Anwar Jan (Choudhary) v. Union Territory of J&K & Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 426
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a preventive detention order under the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978, while observing that animals experience pain, stress and fear and flagging the inadequacy of statutory penalties prescribed for cruelty to animals.
Case Title: Minor Victim (X) Through Her Natural Guardian/Mother v. Union Territory of Ladakh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 427
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court permitted termination of the pregnancy of a 17-year-old minor rape survivor, observing that the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 and the Rules provide a statutory mechanism for dealing with such cases and that continuation of the pregnancy was likely to cause grave injury to her physical and mental health.
Case Title: State of Jammu & Kashmir through Commissioner/Secretary to Government, General Administration Department v. Ghulam Mohammad Lone
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 428
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that premature or compulsory retirement is an administrative measure taken in public interest and cannot be equated with dismissal or removal by way of punishment, holding that judicial review cannot ordinarily substitute the Court's assessment for that of the competent authority where the decision is based on relevant material.
Case Title: Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jan Begum & Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 429
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that death from cardiac arrest may constitute an accident arising out of and in the course of employment where evidence establishes a reasonable nexus between the cardiac event and the stress and strain of long-distance driving, and upheld compensation awarded to the deceased driver's dependants.
Case Title: Mrs. Kareena Jamwal (Alias Zulikha Hussain) v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 430
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that merely being a minor when a mutation was attested cannot explain complete inaction for several decades after attaining majority, and dismissed a challenge to a mutation attested in 1970 on the ground of extraordinary and unexplained delay.
Case Title: National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Radha Devi & Others / National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sham Lal & Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 431
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an insurer cannot avoid liability merely because an offending driver was also found in possession of a fake driving licence where the driver possessed another genuine and effective licence valid at the relevant time, and upheld the compensation awards passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals.
Case Title: Nisar Ahmad Bhat v. Rafia Jan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 432
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that territorial jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 depends upon the minor's actual and ordinary residence, rather than the place where a parent believes the child ought to reside, with the child's welfare remaining paramount.
Case Title: Mohammad Ashraf Ganie v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 433
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court acquitted a man convicted of rape, holding that the material variation between the earliest version of the occurrence as an 'attempt' and the subsequent prosecution case alleging a completed act of sexual intercourse went to the root of the prosecution case and entitled the appellant to the benefit of doubt.
Case Title: M/s Incredible Placement Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 434
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a labour registration licence cannot be insisted upon as a pre-condition for participation in a tender where the requirement has not been specifically stipulated in the tender documents, and directed consideration of the petitioner's technical bid subject to the other tender conditions.
Case Title: Anoop Dutta v. Union Territory of J&K and Others, along with connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 435
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the constitutional validity of amendments prescribing a maximum period of 120 days for filing written statements in civil suits, holding that the period must ordinarily be adhered to strictly while preserving limited judicial discretion in genuinely exceptional circumstances where filing was impossible for reasons beyond the defendant's control.
Case Title: Israr Manzoor v. Takdis Alyas @ Takids Alyas
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 436
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that where a divorce plaint alleges acts of cruelty within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court approached, the plaint cannot be returned merely because the marriage was solemnised and other events occurred elsewhere, as the truth of such allegations cannot be tested at the Order VII Rule 10 stage.
“Territorial Jurisdiction”: J&K&L High Court Dismisses BSF Constable's Plea Against Voluntary Retirement After Beard Permission Was Revoked
Case Title: Khursheed Ahmad Khan v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 437
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a BSF constable's petition challenging acceptance of his voluntary retirement after permission to maintain a neatly trimmed beard was revoked, holding that the Srinagar Bench lacked territorial jurisdiction because no material part of the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction.
Case Title: Haleema and Another v. State of Jammu and Kashmir and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 438
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a landowner cannot be denied consideration of compensation merely because water pipelines were laid through the property before its purchase. It directed the authorities to inspect the site, assess the area occupied and damage caused, and consider acquisition if the land was to be permanently retained.
Case Title: Nazir Ahmad Mir v. Union of India & Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 439
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a BSF personnel's challenge to recovery of ₹6 lakh in ex-gratia relief, finding that he had failed to establish the claimed deaths of six family members and that significant inconsistencies undermined the basis on which the relief had been sanctioned.
Case Title: Ashok Singh Manhas v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 440
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld charges against a man accused of using allegedly forged revenue records to obtain a bank loan, observing that forgery does not invariably require signing another person's name and that creating a document with intent to defraud may amount to making a false document.
Case Title: Sheikh Rafiq Ahmad and Another v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 441
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that revenue authorities cannot refuse to issue Fards in accordance with existing records unless issuance is barred by an order of a competent court or authority. It directed the Tehsildar concerned to issue the requested revenue extracts within one week.
Case Title: Mangat Ram v. Shano Devi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 442
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that Section 151 CPC may, in an appropriate case, permit additional evidence after closure of evidence where necessary in the interests of justice, while clarifying that the power cannot be invoked routinely.
Case Title: Col. R.S. Parmar (Retd.) v. Union of India & Others; AFCONS Infrastructure Limited v. Union of India & Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 443
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a contractual arrangement for wage disbursement cannot completely exclude a principal employer's statutory obligations towards contract labour. In a connected matter, it set aside an award passed without impleading the principal employer and remitted the matter for reconsideration.
Case Title: Union Territory of J&K v. Shabir Ahmad Dar
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 444
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court set aside bail granted in a 24-kg ganja case, holding that an illegal or perverse bail order may be set aside even without subsequent misuse of liberty where the trial court failed to adequately consider the NDPS Act's statutory twin conditions.
Case Title: M/s Kashmir Confectionary Store & Others v. M/s Mother Choice Health Care India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 445
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that alleged non-registration of an enterprise under the MSME Act at the time of a transaction does not, by itself, render arbitral awards a nullity or oust the Facilitation Council's jurisdiction. It dismissed three revision petitions challenging execution of awards passed in favour of the supplier.
Case Title: Mohi Ud Din v. Union of India & Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 446
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that interest on delayed compensation follows statutory default, but a penalty under Section 4-A(3)(b) of the Employees' Compensation Act requires a finding of unjustified delay after an opportunity to show cause. It remitted the penalty issue to the Commissioner.
Case Title: Din Mohd Wani v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 447
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court at Jammu quashed the preventive detention of 65-year-old Din Mohd Wani, holding that allegations of illegal bovine transportation and cruelty, without material showing communal tension or disturbance of law and order, could not by themselves establish a threat to public order.
Case Title: Mohammad Shafi Lone and Bilal Ahmad Dar v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 448
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court acquitted two men convicted under the NDPS Act, holding that the prosecution could not rely on an Executive Magistrate's presence to validate a search while disregarding his testimony that the contraband had been recovered from the vehicle, not the appellants' persons. The Court found material doubts about recovery and compliance with Section 50.
Case Title: Manhar Gupta and Others v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 449
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court set aside an order directing further investigation into alleged SAUBHAGYA scheme irregularities, noting that the ACB investigation, departmental proceedings and third-party inspections had not established criminal misconduct or conspiracy by the concerned officials.
Case Title: Qadeer-Ul-Rehman and Another v. State of J&K and Another
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 450
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed an FIR directed by a Magistrate in an administrative land dispute, holding that an application which did not seek registration of an FIR and did not comply with the safeguards governing Section 156(3) CrPC could not be used to criminalise the dispute.
Mere Use Of Forged Document Not Offence Unless Knowledge Of Forgery Is Established: J&K&L High Court
Case Title: Ankush Sharma Vs UT of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 451
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that mere use of a forged document as genuine does not, by itself, constitute an offence under Section 471 RPC; the prosecution must establish that the accused knew or had reason to believe that the document was forged and used it fraudulently or dishonestly. The precise case title was not recoverable from the accessible article metadata and should be confirmed before publication.
Case Title: Kaiser Hameed Beigh v. Union Territory of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 452
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed Kaiser Hameed Beigh's preventive detention order, holding that unexplained delay of more than two years in executing it, despite his regular court attendance, snapped the live and proximate link between past allegations and the need for detention.
Case Title: Devinder Singh and Others v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 453
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted bail to the accused, observing that caste-based abuse directed at a woman who did not herself belong to a Scheduled Caste community would not attract the SC/ST Act merely because her husband belonged to that community. The Court clarified that the investigation could continue and directed that the charge sheet not be filed without its permission.
Case Title: Khayal Shafi Badana v. Union Territory Through Police Station Rajbagh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 454
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted bail to an accused in a commercial-quantity narcotics case, noting that no contraband had been recovered from him, call detail records did not reveal the contents of conversations, and bank credits were not clearly linked to drug proceeds. It held that the seriousness of the charge alone could not justify continued detention where the material against the particular accused was not sufficiently compelling.
Case Title: Tara Chand and Another v. Bhagat Ram
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 455
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a plaintiff claiming ownership by adverse possession does not necessarily take contradictory pleas by referring to an agreement to sell to explain entry into possession. It also held that khasra numbers, measurements and other revenue particulars may sufficiently identify immovable property for Order VII Rule 3 CPC.
Case Title: Farhat Ali Khanday v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 456
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court declined to direct removal of the petitioner's name from the police-maintained list of Over Ground Workers while a UAPA trial and his challenge to dismissal from government service on national-security grounds remained pending. The Court held that these issues could not be determined in the writ petition at that stage.
CPC | Order Rejecting Application Under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC Appealable Under Order 43: J&K High Court
Case Title: Sheikh Mohammad Yaseen v. Ali Mohammad Shora
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 457
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that an order rejecting an application under Order IX Rule 9 CPC to restore a suit dismissed for non-prosecution is appealable under Order XLIII Rule 1(c) CPC. It upheld restoration of the ejectment suit, noting that the application was filed within seven days and sufficient cause for the absence had been shown.
Case Title: Bashir Ahmed v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 458
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a father's habeas corpus petition seeking recovery of his adult daughter, finding that she had voluntarily married and chosen to reside with her husband. It held that habeas corpus cannot be used to compel an adult to live with a parent when no unlawful detention is established.
Case Title: Mohammad Sultan Bhat v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 459
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the removal of three private individuals from the array of defendants under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC, holding that they could not be compelled to remain parties where no cause of action or relief was pleaded against them and their presence was unnecessary for effective adjudication.
J&K&L High Court Upholds ₹7.2 Lakh Compensation For House Damaged By Road Construction
Case Title: Commissioner Secretary, PMGSY & Others v. Mohd. Iqbal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 460
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld a decree awarding ₹7.2 lakh, with interest, to a Ramban resident whose house was damaged during road construction. It held that the defendants could not withhold their defence during trial and seek a fresh opportunity after judgment, particularly when material testimony had not been effectively challenged.
Case Title: Mst. Sakeena Banoo v. Union Territory of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 461
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a challenge to cancellation of a woman's provisional selection as an Aaya/Helper, holding that a school discharge certificate based on official academic records prevailed over a medical opinion assessing her age. The school record showed that she had not attained the prescribed minimum age by the cut-off date.
Case Title: X v. Union Territory of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 462
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court directed Lalla Ded Hospital, Srinagar, to constitute a Medical Board for immediate examination of a woman whose foetus was diagnosed with serious abnormalities at nearly 32 weeks of pregnancy. The Court stressed that medical practitioners must discharge their statutory duties under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act and take prompt action in justified cases.
Case Title: UT of J&K Vs Neeru Pandita
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 463
A Full Bench of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that the right to regularisation under Section 5 of the J&K Civil Services (Special Provisions) Act, 2010 accrues when the prescribed statutory conditions are fulfilled and does not depend on the date of the formal order. It also held that the 150-day period under Section 10 is procedural.
Case Title: Mushtaq Ahmad Rafiqee v. Mohammad Amin Wani & Another
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 464
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld unconditional leave to defend a ₹1.35-crore summary suit, holding that the defendants had raised a substantial triable issue by disputing the plaintiff's ownership of the land against which the cheques were allegedly issued. The Court found that the defence was neither doubtful nor fanciful.
Case Title: Gurpartap Singh v. National Investigation Agency
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 465
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court refused bail to a man accused of financing a cross-border heroin-smuggling operation allegedly linked to Babbar Khalsa International, holding that the material on record prima facie indicated his role in the alleged conspiracy. The stringent bail restrictions under the UAPA and NDPS Act applied.
Case Title: Union of India v. Babu Ram
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 466
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld an Armed Forces Tribunal order granting disability pension to an ex-Lance Naik, holding that where no disability was recorded at enrolment, it is presumed to have arisen during service unless rebutted by cogent medical evidence. The Medical Board had given no reasons for its contrary opinion.
Case Title: Brij Lal and Others v. Union Territory of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 467
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a plea to quash a criminal charge sheet, holding that proceedings under Sections 107 and 117 CrPC are preventive, not punitive, and therefore do not attract the constitutional bar against double jeopardy. Previous enmity between the parties did not, by itself, disprove the alleged occurrence.
Case Title: Abdul Rashid and Another v. Union Territory of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 468
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed orders declaring the petitioners unauthorised occupants under the Migrant Immovable Property Act, 1997, holding that authorities must examine the origin and legal character of long-standing possession before ordering eviction. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration.
Case Title: Union Territory of J&K v. Nissar Ahmad and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 469
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court set aside a Tribunal order granting a police officer retrospective out-of-turn promotion, holding that a recommendation does not create an enforceable right to promotion from that date. The Court also held that parity with another officer could not, by itself, establish entitlement.
Case Title: Sheeri Pal Singh v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 470
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a plea seeking quashing of a charge under the J&K Prevention of Corruption Act, holding that omission to name a specific offence in a sanction order does not invalidate it where the allegations and material referred to disclose the ingredients of that offence. A coordinate Bench had already decided the same issue in the connected criminal case.
Case Title: Raj Sharma (Bharti) v. Collector Land Acquisition and Another
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 471
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court set aside a reference court judgment after finding that possession of four kanals of alternate land awarded to the landowner had not been delivered. It directed the authorities to identify and hand over equivalent State or Jammu Development Authority land within three months.
Case Title: Rajat Kumar v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 472
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court rejected anticipatory bail sought by a rape accused who had been declared a proclaimed offender and had not joined the investigation for years. The Court held that he had shown no exceptional circumstance warranting a direct approach to the High Court instead of the Sessions Court.
Case Title: Renu Mahajan v. Achal Sethi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 473
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court closed contempt proceedings against government officials, holding that a reasonable interpretation of a judicial direction does not amount to wilful disobedience where the original order permits more than one plausible interpretation. The authorities had implemented the directions actually issued by the writ court.
Case Title: Jaydeep Singh Jadeja v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 474
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a complaint and process order, holding that Section 91 CrPC cannot be used to compel document production during preliminary verification when no formal investigation or inquiry has commenced. Preliminary verification cannot be converted into an investigation to test allegations or compel a proposed accused to provide documents.
Case Title: Union Territory of J&K v. Harmeet Singh and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 475
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court modified a Tribunal order directing regularisation of casual workers, holding that the Government cannot select persons from the open market and later regularise them outside a fair recruitment process. The workers were, however, held entitled to consideration for regular engagement under the applicable Rules.
Case Title: Dr. Saima Kabir v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 476
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court directed the authorities to pay a doctor salary for the period she actually worked, holding that withholding earned remuneration violates Article 23 even where her engagement was later cancelled retrospectively. It also directed consideration of a factual experience certificate for the period of actual service.
Case Title: Tariq Ahmad Dar v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 477
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld preventive detention under the Public Safety Act of a man implicated in 11 livestock-theft cases, holding that the repeated nature of the alleged conduct and its impact on the local community could disturb public order. The Court found no constitutional or statutory infirmity warranting interference.
Case Title: Rouf Ahmad Wani v. Union Territory of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 478
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a preventive detention order, holding that general allegations of anti-social conduct and stale criminal antecedents, including cases ending in acquittal, could not establish a current threat to public order without specific supporting material. The unexplained delay in executing the order further weakened the live and proximate link.
Case Title: Jahangir Iqbal Ganai v. Md Amin Dar and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 479
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a Tribunal order imposing ₹10,000 costs on Senior Advocate Jahangir Iqbal Ganai without giving him an opportunity of being heard. The Division Bench held that the order violated natural justice and urged restraint in handling heated exchanges between the Bar and the Bench.
Case Title: Riaz and Others v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 480
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the denial of default bail to three UAPA accused, holding that further investigation into their alleged links with slain or absconding terrorists did not, by itself, render the chargesheet incomplete. The Bench found that investigation into the offences attributed to the accused had been completed on the material collected.
Postal Receipt Alone Cannot Establish Service Of Court Summons: J&K&L High Court
Case Title: Union Territory of J&K and Others v. Mehmooda Shaheen Medical Trust Hospital
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 481
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a postal receipt alone does not establish due service of summons without satisfaction that it was properly addressed and sent to the correct address. It condoned a 110-day delay in seeking to set aside an ex-parte decree, leaving the trial court to decide that application on merits.
Case Title: Hamid Hussain v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 482
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court granted bail to Hamid Hussain, who had remained in custody for about eleven years in a 2016 case alleging the murder of his wife. Given the substantial number of prosecution witnesses still unexamined and the unlikely near-term conclusion of trial, the Court held that prolonged pre-trial incarceration offended the right to speedy trial under Article 21.
Case Title: Tariq Ahmad Dar v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 483
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed Tariq Ahmad Dar's preventive detention under the Public Safety Act, holding that repeated involvement in livestock-theft cases did not, by itself, establish a threat to public order. As the criminal cases were already pending, the ordinary criminal law machinery was sufficient to deal with the allegations.
Case Title: Mst. Themud v. Ram Nath & Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 484
The High Court allowed a civil second appeal and restored the trial court's decree in favour of a woman claiming a share in her father's property. It held that an adverse mutation entry made during her minority did not, by itself, amount to a clear and unequivocal denial of her rights so as to trigger limitation; the defendants failed to prove when such denial occurred.
When Can Courts Reopen Evidence Under Section 151 CPC After Trial Closes: J&K&L High Court Explains
Case Title: Mangat Ram v. Shano Devi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 485
The High Court held that Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC permits recall of a witness to clarify evidence, not to fill omissions. However, Section 151 CPC may be invoked in an appropriate case to permit additional evidence after closure of trial when it is relevant and necessary in the interests of justice. The Court partly allowed the petition, setting aside costs and recall of two witnesses.
Case Title: Bansi Lal Bhardwaj v. S. Gagandeep Singh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 486
The High Court held that Section 528 BNSS cannot be invoked to circumvent the statutory bar on a second revision and observed that 90 days is ordinarily a reasonable time to invoke the provision, with delay beyond that period requiring explanation. It also held that an accused may establish a defence through sale deeds without examining every person connected with the transactions.
Case Title: Villagers of Chutuk and Others v. Mohammad Hussain
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 487
The High Court at Leh dismissed a petition challenging the impleadment of villagers and consequential amendments to the pleadings. It held that a procedural defect pointed out by the opposite party does not create an absolute bar against rectification, where the amendment does not introduce a new cause of action or fundamentally alter the suit and the added defendants are afforded an opportunity to respond.
Case Title: Ikram Tahir v. Union Territory of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 488
The High Court granted anticipatory bail to a 23-year-old man accused of having sexual relations with a woman on the alleged false promise of marriage and to his mother, accused of abetment. The Court considered the complainant's account of a relationship lasting about one-and-a-half years and the circumstances in which the proposed marriage failed, clarifying that its observations would not prejudice the trial.
Case Title: Javed Ahmad Bhat v. Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 489
The High Court disposed of three petitions by contractual and daily-wage workers of IGNOU's Srinagar Regional Centre, directing the University to consider their claims in light of a Division Bench ruling that its regional centres in J&K function as permanent establishments with cadre posts. The Court left the question of regularisation to the University's competent decision-making authority.
Case Title: Abdul Rehman Wagay Gawgojree v. Nazir Ahmad Wagay & Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 490
The High Court dismissed a petition under Article 227 challenging orders directing the parties to maintain status quo over disputed property. It held that permission to continue construction during a pending suit is not an absolute right, particularly where the petitioner was accused of wilfully violating an existing status quo direction.
Case Title: Mushtaq Ahmad v. Union Territory of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 491
The High Court quashed a preventive detention order after finding that the detaining authority had mechanically inferred a threat to communal harmony from allegations that the detenue transported male bovine animals, including yaks. The authority had failed to distinguish yaks from cows or identify material showing a likelihood of communal disharmony.
Case Title: X X X X v. Union Territory of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 492
The High Court dismissed a petition by a minor victim seeking quashing of a POCSO chargesheet, holding that a relationship, solemnisation of Nikah and the victim's wish to live with the accused may be mitigating factors relevant to bail but cannot erase the offence where she was below the age of consent. The Court also held that the minor could not independently invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction.
Case Title: Vivek Bassan v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 493
The High Court granted interim bail to a former Police Inspector facing trial in connection with his wife's death, pending adjudication of his main bail petition. Justice Rahul Bharti considered the impact of his continued custody on his 82-year-old ailing father and 12-year-old son, who depended on the grandfather for day-to-day care.
Case Title: M/s Mass N Energy and Others v. Union of India and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 494
The High Court struck down the levy of water-usage charges on hydropower projects under the 2010 Act, holding that the levy was, in substance, a tax on the generation of electricity and beyond the legislative competence of the erstwhile State. The Division Bench also quashed consequential demand notices and restrained imposition of such a tax under the guise of water-usage charges.
Case Title: Shakoor Ahmed v. Union Territory of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 495
The High Court quashed Shakoor Ahmed's preventive detention after finding that he had not been informed of his right to make a representation to the District Magistrate who passed the detention order. Justice Rahul Bharti held that the Advisory Board must independently scrutinise compliance with procedural safeguards and cannot act as a mere post office facilitating confirmation of detention.
Case Title: Shanaza Banoo v. Union Territory of J&K and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 496
The High Court dismissed a fresh writ petition seeking permission to perform duties as an Aaya, holding that the same relief had already been addressed in an earlier writ petition. As the earlier direction remained unimplemented and contempt proceedings were pending, the Court held that the proper course was to pursue those proceedings rather than institute a fresh petition.
Case Title: Ghulam Mohammad Dhobi v. Abdul Hamid Malla
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 497
The High Court dismissed an appeal against an interlocutory direction to deposit alleged rent arrears and occupational charges, holding that a disputed liability cannot be converted into an admitted obligation by drawing inferences from isolated statements. Order XXXIX Rule 10 CPC requires a clear and unequivocal admission; an order made under Section 151 CPC is not appealable merely because it is interlocutory.