Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup: 5 May - 11 May 2025

Nominal Index:Suchet Singh & Anr Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 175Mst Sara Vs Financial Commissioner Revenue JK Srinagar 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 176Mohd Afzal Beigh Vs Noor Hussain 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 177Mohammad Shafi Gojar Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 178Abdul Majid Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 179Mohammad Najeeb Goni Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 180GHULAM RASOOL BHAT Vs. SHAFEEQ FRUIT COMPANY 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 181Shivani Misri Vs Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 182Judgments/Orders: FIR Not Invalid Merely Due To Prior Civil Or Criminal Case, But Must Be Scrutinized For Ulterior Motives If Filed Soon After: J&K High CourtCase Title: Suchet Singh & Anr Vs UT Of J&KCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 175The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh observed that an FIR cannot be dismissed merely on the ground that it was lodged after the initiation of a civil or criminal proceeding. However, when such FIRs are filed shortly thereafter, the Court stressed, they must be closely examined to rule out any ulterior motives behind the criminal prosecution, the court clarified.Fiction Of Subsisting Contract Between Advocate & Deceased Client Only For Limited Purpose Of Informing Court About Client's Death: J&K High CourtCase Title: Mst Sara Vs Financial Commissioner Revenue JK SrinagarCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 176Reinforcing a critical procedural safeguard, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar held that Order XXII Rule 10A CPC introduces a legal fiction deeming the contract between an advocate and a deceased party as subsisting but only for the limited and essential purpose of requiring the advocate to inform the Court about the death of the party they represent.S.142 NI Act | No Bar On Magistrates From Adhering To Pre-Cognisance Notice Requirements U/S 223 Of BNSS: J&K High Court ClarifiesCase Title: Mohd Afzal Beigh Vs Noor HussainCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 177The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that the provisions of Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (N.I. Act) do not bar Magistrates from adhering to the pre-cognizance notice requirements under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).Statutory Limitations U/S 37 Of NDPS Act Limited To Merits, Not Humanitarian Grounds: J&K HC Permits Interim Bail To Elderly Man With Critical Medical IssuesCase Title: Mohammad Shafi Gojar Vs UT Of J&KCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 178Underlining the balance between the rigours of the NDPS Act and humanitarian concerns, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, Srinagar Wing, has granted temporary bail to a 71-year-old man suffering from serious health ailments. The Court held,“Provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act come into play only when bail of a person accused of an offence involving commercial quantity of contraband is being considered on merits, and the limitations contained therein would not come into play when bail is to be granted on humanitarian grounds like medical grounds.”J&K High Court Slams Arbitrary Demolition Of Senior Citizen's Property, Orders Payment Of ₹86 Lakhs For 'Clandestine' ActionCase Title: Abdul Majid Vs UT Of J&KCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 179The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court delivered a scathing rebuke to the UT administration for its arbitrary demolition of properties owned by one Abdul Majid, a 69-year-old resident of Bathindi, Jammu.Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal, while allowing two writ petitions declared the demolition illegal, restored Majid's ownership rights, and awarded him ₹76.4 lakh in compensation for damages, along with an additional ₹10 lakh as punitive costs for the "clandestine and high-handed" actions of the authorities.Offence Of Criminal Trespass Not Obliterated Once Possession Of Land Is Recovered From Illegal Occupants: J&K High CourtCase Title: Mohammad Najeeb Goni Vs UT Of J&KCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 180The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that the offence of criminal trespass is not extinguished merely because the possession of State land is later recovered from the illegal occupant.“The moment a person illegally occupies the State land with a view to insult or annoy any person in possession of such property or with an intent to commit an offence, the offence under Section 447-A RPC is complete,” Justice Sanjay Dhar observed while dismissing a petition.Court While Referring Parties To Arbitration Cannot Direct That Arbitral Award Should Be Filed Before It: Jammu & Kashmir High CourtCase Title: GHULAM RASOOL BHAT Vs. SHAFEEQ FRUIT COMPANYCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 181The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar held that the court, while referring parties to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), cannot direct that the award, passed after the conclusion of the arbitration proceedings, be filed before it."Failed To Ensure Reasonable Accommodation": J&K High Court Overturns AAI's...

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup: 5 May - 11 May 2025

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags