Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup July 21 - July 27, 2025

Nominal Index:GHULAM MOHAMMAD PAYER Vs AMANULLA KHAN 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 283Sundri and Ors Vs J&K Bank &Anr 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 284UT of J&K vs Ameer Hamza Shah 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 285State of Jammu and Kashmir Vs Tajinder Singh 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 286Naresh Kumar Gulia Vs Directorate of Enforcement 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 287Aamir Bashir Magray Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 288Waheed Shafi Sheikh Vs Naseer Ahmad Ganai 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 289Naseer Ahmad Sheikh vs Jammu and Kashmir Bank limited 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 290MUBASHIR AHMAD WANI Vs MEELAZ MUBASHIR & ANOTHER 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 291Judgments/Orders:[S.200 CrPC] No Bar On Complainant To Approach Magistrate With Criminal Complaint Before Going To Police: J&K High CourtCase-Title: GHULAM MOHAMMAD PAYER Vs AMANULLA KHAN,Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 283The Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled that a complainant alleging a cognizable offence is not bound to first approach the police for lodging an FIR and may directly move the Magistrate under Section 200 CrPC.The Court added that no illegality is committed in such cases where the Magistrate takes cognizance based on the complaint.SARFAESI Act | Fresh Notice To Legal Heirs Of Borrower Not Necessary To Take Possession Under S.14: J&K High CourtCase-Title: Mst. Sundri and Ors Vs J&K Bank &AnrCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 284The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that a secured creditor is not required to issue a fresh notice to the legal heirs of a deceased borrower before invoking Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002.Labelling J&K 'Occupied Territory', Calling For Its Secession From India Is An 'Unlawful Activity' Under UAPA: J&K&L High CourtCase-Title: UT of J&K vs Ameer Hamza ShahCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 285The Jammu & Kashmir held that advocating for the secession of Jammu & Kashmir from the Union of India constitutes an "unlawful activity" under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and squarely attracts Section 13(1) of the Act.J&K And Ladakh High Court Upholds Acquittal In 2005 Jammu Terror CaseCase Title: State of Jammu and Kashmir Vs Tajinder SinghCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 286"Non-association of independent civilian witnesses, despite their availability at the time of arrest and alleged recovery, casts a serious shadow over the credibility of the investigation" , observed the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh while upholding the acquittal of two men accused in a 2005 terror-linked arms recovery case in Jammu.J&K High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Man Accused Of Masterminding Large-Scale International Cryptocurrency ScamCase Title: Naresh Kumar Gulia Vs Directorate of EnforcementCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 287In a crypto-currency fraud case, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh denied the pre-arrest bail plea by Naresh Kumar Gulia, who is alleged to have set up a huge fake crypto Ponzi scam that tricked many investors in India and other places.Mere Involvement In 'Grave Economic Offence' Not Organised Crime U/S 111 Of BNS: J&K&L High CourtCase Title: Aamir Bashir Magray Vs UT Of J&KCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 288Observing that the invocation of organised crime provisions under Section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) requires strict compliance with the statutory prerequisites, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that mere involvement in a grave economic offence is not sufficient to attract the rigours of Section 111 BNS.Complainant's Incarceration Is A Valid Reason To Allow Condonation Of Delay: J&K&L High CourtCase Title: Waheed Shafi Sheikh Vs Naseer Ahmad GanaiCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 289The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that a complainant's time in jail is a valid reason to excuse delay in filing appeals, even if a special power of attorney was appointed to represent him.'Errors In Administrative Judgement Should Not Attract Severest Punishments': J&K&L HC Quashes Retrospective Dismissal Of Retired EmployeeCase-Title: Naseer Ahmad Sheikh vs Jammu and Kashmir Bank limitedCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 290The Jammu & Kashmir High Court took strong exception to the retrospective dismissal of the officer, passed after his retirement and noted that the punishment imposed was not commensurate with the nature of the alleged lapses.Women Can Seek Relief Under DV Act Even During Maintenance Enforcement Proceedings Under CrPC: J&K High CourtCase Title: MUBASHIR AHMAD WANI Vs MEELAZ MUBASHIR & ANOTHERCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 291Affirming the expansive protective scope of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that a woman aggrieved by domestic violence is entitled to seek residence or other reliefs under Sections 18 to 22 of the Act in any legal proceeding including enforcement proceedings under Section 488(3) of the J&K CrPC (Pari Materia with Sec 125 CrPC) by invoking Section 26 of the Act.

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup July 21 - July 27, 2025

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags