Nominal Index

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ghulam Nabi Mir Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 144

Makhan Lal Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 145

Rahul Kumar Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 146

Ravi Kumar Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 147

Judgments/Orders:

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

Case Title: Ashok Kumar Sharma Vs Union of India.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 138

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

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

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

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 139

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

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

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

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 140

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

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

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

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

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 141

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

A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal has observed,

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

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

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

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 142

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

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

Case Title: Bharosi Lal Vs Union of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 143

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

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Says Bid Security Is Indispensable In Tendering Process, Rejects Substitution With Performance Security

Case Title: Ghulam Nabi Mir Vs UT of J&K.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 144

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court said that bid security cannot be substituted by performance security as both are distinguishable and are submitted on different stages of the tender process.

S.446 CrPC | Accused Must Be Given Opportunity Before Court Records Satisfaction As To Breach Of Bond: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Makhan Lal Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 145

Stressing on the need to ensure fairness and due process in cases where breach of a bond under Section 446 CrPC is alleged, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has said it is mandatory that the court issues a notice first, providing the accused an opportunity to explain any alleged breaches.

If the court remains unsatisfied with the explanation provided by the accused, only then can it proceeds to record its satisfaction of such breach, it clarified.

Leniency In Matters Involving Unnatural Offences Not Only Undesirable, But Also Against Public Interest: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Rahul Kumar Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 146

Dismissing a bail application of a person in a case under Section 377, 506 IPC and Sections 4 & 5 of POCSO Act, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that leniency in matters involving unnatural offences is not only undesirable, but also against public interest. Such types of offences are to be dealt with severity and with iron hands and leniency in such matters would be really a case of misplaced sympathy, said the court.

When Victim Avoids Stepping Into Witness Box, Such Conduct Sufficient To Entitle Accused To Bail: Jammu & Kashmir High Court In POCSO Case

Case Title: Ravi Kumar Vs UT of J&K.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 147

Granting bail to an accused in a POCSO case, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has said that simply because the prosecutrix keeps herself away from appearing in court, the plea for bail cannot be deferred indefinitely.

"It is not the case of the prosecution that trial is being delayed because of the conduct of the accused but it is a case where the victim is avoiding to step into the witness box. This conduct of the victim is sufficient to entitle the petitioner to the concession of bail," Justice Sanjay Dhar observed.