Delay In Receiving Award Due To Default In Paying Arbitral Fees Cannot Be Held Against Party Seeking To Challenge Award While Calculating Limitation: J&K HC

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that since the delivery of a signed copy of the arbitral award was the mandatory requirement under the arbitration act therefore, the limitation for challenging the said award would arise only after the said signed copy is received by the party seeking to challenge the same.The petitioner had not received the certified copy of the award dated 01.03.2024...

Plea Of Non-Compliance With S.154 CrPC Need Not Be Looked At When Chargesheet Is Filed Disclosing Commission Of Offence: J&K High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court observed that the requirement of checking the non-compliance of the provisions of section 154 CrPC was not needed at the stage when the investigation in the matter was complete and chargesheet had already been filed disclosing the commission of the cognizable offence. The petitioners had challenged the order of magistrate directing the registration of...

Failure To Communicate Rejection Of Detenue's Representation In Time Vitiates Detention Order: J&K High Court

Emphasizing the importance of procedural safeguards in preventive detention cases, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that the government's failure to communicate the rejection of a detenue's representation in a time-bound manner is sufficient to vitiate the detention order.Justice Sanjay Dhar, while quashing the detention of one Mohd Iqbal Koka under the Jammu &...

Publishing Notice Only In English Newspaper Without Giving Mandatory Notice In Regional Language Vitiates Land Acquisition Proceedings: J&K HC

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled that not publishing the notices as provided under the land acquisition Act for the benefit of the occupants of the land by publishing the notices in local language at conspicuous places vitiates the entire acquisition proceedings. The petitioner had challenged the land acquisition by the government for the public purposes citing that they had...

No Absolute Right To Bypass Mandatory Pre-Litigation Mediation By Seeking Urgent Interim Relief Without Reasonable Grounds: J&K High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has held that under the Commercial Courts Act, a party does not have an absolute choice to bypass the statutorily mandated pre-litigation mediation by praying for interim relief without justifying the same with reasonable grounds. The court was dealing with the application seeking the dispensation of the mediation process under 12-A of the act on...

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup March 24 - March 30, 2025

Nominal Index:General Officer Commanding corps & Ors. vs Aijaz Ahmad Mir & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 110State Of J&K Vs Khurshid Ahmad Naqeeb 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 111Dileep Kumar Raina and Ors. vs UT of J&K and others 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 112Saraj Din vs Liyaqat Ali 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 113STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR vs KHURSHEED AHMAD NAQEEB 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 114Manohar Singh vs...

Mere Call Records Without Voice Recordings May Not Be Sufficient For Conviction U/S 27-A Of NDPS Act: J&K High Court Grants Bail To Alleged Drug Supplier

"CDR details showing contact between the petitioner and the co-accused, without there being any voice recording relating to conversation between them, may not be sufficient to convict the petitioner for offence under Section 27-A of NDPS Act, though it raises a suspicion about his involvement in the alleged crime," observed Justice Sanjay Dhar of the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High...

S.482 CrPC | Courts Duty Bound To Examine Overall Circumstances To Probe Malicious Intent In Criminal Cases: J&K High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that while exercising its inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C), it is the duty of the Court to look beyond the mere allegations in an FIR or complaint and assess the attending circumstances to determine if the criminal proceedings have been initiated maliciously.Justice Sanjay Dhar emphasized that if it appears that criminal law is being used as a weapon for personal vendetta, the Court must intervene to...

Quashing FIR On Perception Of Complainant's Non-Support To Prosecution Case Unjustified, Accused Can Seek Discharge Before Trial Court: J&K High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that merely quashing an FIR or complaint based on the perception that the complainant will not support the prosecution's case is not justified in law.A bench of Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul emphasized that the Sessions Court has the power to discharge an accused under Section 227 Cr.P.C. even before trial, making it unnecessary to invoke...

Different Approach Must Be Adopted In Bail Pleas Arising Out Of Corruption Cases Of Huge Magnitude: J&K HC Denies Bail To Chief Engineer

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that while determining a bail application, the severity of the punishment is an important but not the only factor; the court must also consider the nature and gravity of the offence with which the applicant is charged.The court said that the allegations were not of an ordinary kind and fell under a different league. The case involved corruption...

Registering Officer Cannot Evaluate Title Or Irregularity In Document: J&K HC Directs Adherence To Statutory Duties Under Registration Act

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that a Registering Officer's role is purely administrative and does not extend to determining the title of a document's executor.Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal emphasized that as per the Registration Act and Rules, a Registering Officer is only required to register documents accompanied by supporting documents and has no authority to...

J&K High Court Declares Work Done By Contractor As Illegal, Says He Acted In Connivance With Executive Engineer To Manipulate Tender Process

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has highlighted the high-handedness of the Executive Engineer in colluding with the appellant to procure the contract illegally. The court said that the work, if any, executed by the appellant was without any authority, and he was not entitled to any money in exchange for the work done.The court stated that once Respondent No.1 was declared the lowest bidder,...