[S.33 Insecticides Act] All Those Responsible For Conduct Of Business Liable When Company Commits Offense Under Insecticides Act: J&K High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that under the Insecticides Act, 1968, if a company commits an offence, both the company and the individuals in charge at the time are considered guilty and can be prosecuted and punished.While quashing criminal proceedings against employees of a company without actually arraying the company as an accused A bench of Justice Rajnesh...

Once Complainant's Statement Is Recorded U/S 200 CrPC, Magistrate Can't Pass Directions To Register FIR U/S 156(3): J&K High Court

Reinforcing the distinction between a magistrate's powers under Cr.P.C. Sections 156(3) (pre-cognizance) and 200 (cognizance) when handling complaints, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that recording a complainant's statement under Section 200 prohibits issuing an FIR order under Section 156(3).Citing M/S Sas Infratech Pvt. Ltd. Appellant(s) vs. The State of Telangana...

[Domestic Violence Act] No Specific Bar On Filing Appeal Before Sessions Court To Challenge Interim Orders: J&K High Court Clarifies

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has affirmed that there is no specific bar to filing an appeal before the sessions court against an interim order passed under the Domestic Violence (DV) Act.Highlighting the absence of any such bar on the interim orders a bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed, “if the Legislature intended to keep the interim orders out of the purview of Section 29...

Specific Allegations Against Husband's Relatives Essential To Warrant Their Prosecution For Cruelty U/S 498A IPC: J&K High Court Reiterates

Emphasising that relatives of the husband cannot be prosecuted under Section 498-A IPC based on general and vague allegations, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has underscored the necessity for specific allegations to warrant their prosecution.Quashing an FIR to the extent the parents of an accused-husband are concerned, Justice Rajnesh Oswal observed,“There must be...

Courts Must Examine Circumstances Beyond Allegations In FIR In Potentially Vexatious Proceedings: J&K High Court

Emphasising the need to look beyond the FIR in cases potentially involving frivolous complaints, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed an FIR against a person finding him to be falsely implicated in a case of assault and molestation.A bench comprising Justice Rajnesh Oswal while referencing Salib @ Shalu @ Salim vs. State of UP and ors”. Salib v. State of U.P., 2023 reiterated...

Jammu And Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup 17th June 2024 - 23rd June 2024

Nominal Index:Rayees Ahmad Khan Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 160Aaftab Hussain Dar Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 161Mumtaz Ahmad Mir Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 162Suhail Ahmad Lone Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 163Dr. Junaid Vs Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 164Manzoor Ahmad Bhat Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 165Judgments/Orders:'State Security' No...

Prosecution Must Prove Continuous Harassment And Proximate Act For Securing Conviction Of Abetment To Suicide: J&K High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has observed that for a conviction on charges of abetment to suicide, the prosecution must establish not just continuous harassment but also a clear and proximate act by the accused that demonstrably pushed the victim to take their own life.In dismissing a criminal appeal challenging the acquittal of a man accused of abetting his wife's suicide due...

Non-Mention Of Bail Granted To Accused In FIR-Based Detention Order Renders Detention Illegal: J&K High Court

Quashing a preventive detention order the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has declared that once an FIR is the core ground for passing a detention order, the non-mentioning of bail granted in relation to that FIR renders the detention order illegal.A bench comprising Justice Puneet Gupta based this observation on a settled proposition of law that the detaining authority is required...

S. 8(8) PMLA | Bonafide Individuals Suffering Loss Due To Money Laundering Can Approach Special Court To Restore Attached Property: J&K High Court

Reinforcing the protections for individuals who, acting in good faith, suffer losses due to offences of money laundering the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that they are entitled to approach the Special Court to seek restoration of the attached properties.Citing Sec 8 Sub Sec 8 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed,“.. that a...

Constitutional Courts Are Guardians Of Citizen's Fundamental Rights, Must Be Extra Sensitive When Personal Liberty Is Violated: J&K High Court

Quashing a preventive detention order under J&K Public Safety Act 1978 the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has sounded a note of caution for detaining authorities who assume that their powers under the act are unchecked.A bench of Justice Rahul Bharti has stated that subjective satisfaction of the authorities for issuing detention orders cannot be construed as a matter of...

Shortcomings Of Investigative Agency Cannot Hinder Framing Of Charges Based On Evidence Brought On Record: J&K High Court

Highlighting the duties of a Court while framing a charge against an accused the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that investigative shortcomings should not prevent the framing of charges based on the evidence presented.Quashing an order passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (AD&J) Baramulla, directing framing of charges under Section 304 Part-I IPC...

'Unlawful Invasion Of Fundamental Rights': J&K High Court Quashes Illegal Detention, Orders ₹2 Lakh Compensation

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has ordered the Union Territory administration to pay ₹2 lakh as compensation to Aftab Hussain Dar, a 22-year-old student, after quashing his preventive detention, declaring it illegal and unconstitutional.While allowing his habeas corpus plea bench of Justice Rahul Bharti observed, “This Court considers and reckons that this is a fit case...