Central Govt Notifies Transfer Of Justice Atul Sreedharan From J&K High Court To Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Central Government has officially notified the transfer of Justice Atul Sreedharan from the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh back to his parent Madhya Pradesh High Court. The notification, issued on March 13, 2025, states that the transfer has been made under Article 222(1) of the Constitution of India, following consultation with the Chief Justice of India.With this...

Magistrate Can Take Cognizance Under Drugs & Cosmetics Act But Trial Must Be Conducted By Sessions Court: J&K High Court

Setting aside the proceedings against two pharmaceutical companies accused of manufacturing and marketing substandard drugs the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has clarified that while the trial of offences under Chapter IV of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act must be conducted by a Court of Sessions, there is no bar on a Magistrate taking cognizance of such offences.However, Justice...

“Judicial Restraint Essential In Public Tender Disputes”: J&K High Court Quashes Injunction Against AAI's Debarment Order

Stressing the need for judicial restraint in matters involving public tenders and contractual integrity, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has quashed an interim injunction that had stayed the Airports Authority of India's (AAI) debarment order against M/s Saptagiri Restaurant Pvt. Ltd. (SRPL).Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul ruled that courts must refrain from interfering with...

Magistrate Cannot Switch Back To Pre-Cognizance Stage U/S 156 CrPC After Initiating Complaint Inquiry U/S 200 CrPC: J&K High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has held that once the magistrate records the preliminary statement of the complainant and proceeds to direct an inquiry to ascertain the truth of the matter, it is not open to the magistrate to direct the police to register an FIR.Justice Sanjay Dhar observed that once the magistrate opts for the complaint case procedure by taking the preliminary statement of...

NI Act | Single Complaint For Dishonour Of More Than Three Cheques Maintainable If Covered By Consolidated Demand Notice: J&K High Court

Clarifying the legal position under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has held that mere issuance or dishonour of a cheque does not give rise to a cause of action under Section 138 of the Act.While dismissing a petition challenging a complaint under the NI Act Justice Sanjay Dhar observed that a single complaint for multiple dishonoured...

Limitation Rules Not Superfluous, Save System From Anarchy: J&K High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging 39-Yr-Old Mutation Order

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging a mutation order passed 39 years ago reiterating that an unending period for initiating legal remedies could lead to uncertainty and anarchy, upholding the principle that every legal remedy must have a fixed lifespan.“The Rules of Limitation are not superfluous or vestigial but are to be interpreted in...

Psychiatric Treatment Requiring Hospitalization Can Be Covered Under Mediclaim If Policy Terms Do Not Explicitly Bar Such Cases: J&K High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that if hospitalization is deemed necessary by medical experts, insurance companies cannot deny claims solely on the basis of exclusion clauses without proper justification.The petitioner had rejected the claim on the ground that the respondent claimant could have been treated as an outpatient, which would exclude him from making the claim, and also...

Constitutional Courts Must Prevent Fraudulent Gains, Writ Of Certiorari Can Be Denied Over Allegations Of Fraud Requiring Enquiry: J&K High Court

Underscoring the duty of constitutional courts to ensure that no one benefits from fraudulent acts the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court refused to grant the writ of certiorari, emphasizing that when allegations of fraud are raised, the court must inquire into the matter to ensure substantial justice between the parties.“It is the duty of the constitutional courts to ensure that no...

Accused Granted Bail In FIR Cannot Be Re-Arrested For Different Offence In Same Case After Unreasonable Delay: J&K High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that it would amount to a gross deprivation of liberty if an accused who has already been granted bail in the case FIR is charged and arrested for a different offence after a period of 15 years.The trial court had returned the final report as not being in accordance with the law. It had pinpointed that the investigation in the case began under...

Courts Cannot Compel Employers To Retain Contractual Employees Or Alter Terms Of Employment: J&K High Court

Dismissing a plea filed by 150 contractual healthcare workers seeking continuation of their services in Government Medical College (GMC), Jammu the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has reaffirmed that once a contract of employment has been mutually agreed upon without any objection or reservation, courts lack the jurisdiction to compel an employer to maintain the contract or alter...

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up March 3 - March 9, 2025

Nominal Index:XXXX Vs UT of J&K 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 66Abdul Hamid Bhat Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 67ARSHID AHMAD GANIE Vs UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR (HOME) 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 68Peer Rattan Nath Mahant Sh. Shiv ji Maharaj Peer kho Vs Wazir Onkar Singh 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 69Meena Kumari vs Sainik Cooperative House Society Ltd 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 70Bilal Hassan Anim vs...

Omission By Trial Court In Framing Issue On Maintainability Of Suit Does Not Limit Power Of Appellate Court To Decide If Suit Is Maintainable: J&K HC

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that if there is an omission on the part of the trial court to frame an issue on the maintainability of the suit under law, that does not limit the powers of the appellate court to decide the issue of maintainability.The court added that the only requirement is that there should be no new facts that need to be pleaded and no new evidence to be led by...