Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup March 18 - March 24, 2024

Nominal Index:Anil Kumar Aggarwal V/s Enforcement Directorate th. its Assistant Director, Jammu 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 44Union of India Vs Chain Singh & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 45Amit Kumar Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 46Om Prakash Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 47Shani Devi Vs Fr. Tomi Principal Christ School 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 48Shabir Ahmad Wani Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 49Jagdish Kumar Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 50UT of Jammu and Kashmir Vs Rahul Kumar 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 51Qadeer Hussain Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 52Khursheed Ahmad Lone vs Director Social Forestry And Others 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 53Qadeer Hussain Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 54Judgments/Orders:[PMLA] Charges Can't Proceed If Investigation Into Predicate Offence Is Stalled: J&K High CourtCase Title: Anil Kumar Aggarwal V/s Enforcement Directorate th. its Assistant Director, JammuCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 44The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that charges under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) cannot proceed if the investigation into the original crime (known as the predicate offence) is stalled.A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar clarified,“Offences under PMLA are stand alone offences, yet their origin is the Scheduled offences. Once the Scheduled offence ceases to exist or is extinguished, an accused cannot be proceeded against in respect of offences under PMLA”.Two Conflicting Decrees Not Permissible In Same Appeal Against Deceased & Surviving Respondents, Appeal Liable To Be Abated As A Whole: J&K High CourtCase Title: Union of India Vs Chain Singh & Ors.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 45The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, while addressing the ramifications of the abatement of an appeal due to the demise of certain respondents, ruled that proceeding with an appeal against the surviving respondent(s) is untenable hence leading to a dismissal of the appeal in its entirety.Spelling out the reasons for the same Justice M A Chowdhary observed,“..The basic reason being that in the absence of the legal representatives of deceased respondent, the appellate Court cannot determine between appellant and the legal representatives anything which may affect the rights of the legal representatives”.S. 91 CrPC | Accused Can Seek Production Of Document Withheld By Investigator During Charge Framing If It Is Found To Be Of Sterling Quality: J&K HCCase Title: Amit Kumar Vs UT of J&KCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 46The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified the legal position regarding an accused's right to produce evidence at the stage of framing charges and ruled that an application under Section 91 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) can be made by the accused even during the framing of charges if certain conditions are met.A bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar had said,“An application under Section 91 CrPC at the instance of the accused would lie even at the stage of framing of charge if the accused makes out a case that there is a document or material of sterling quality lying with the I.O, but has not been submitted to the Court along with the charge-sheet and such document or material is necessary and desirable for the purposes of framing of charge”.J&K Land Revenue Act | Power To Set Aside Mutation Quasi-Judicial In Nature, No Such Administrative Power Vested With Dy Commissioner: J&K High CourtCase Title: Om Prakash Vs UT Of J&KCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 47The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a Deputy Commissioner has no power to set aside mutation orders passed by a Tehsildar, highlighting that such power is quasi-judicial and requires adherence to principles of natural justice.Citing various provisions of the J&K Land Revenue Act Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,“I am afraid, there is no such administrative power vested with the Deputy Commissioner that would give him jurisdiction to set aside the mutation orders passed by the Tehsildar. The power to attest a mutation as also the power to set aside the mutation, is quasi judicial in nature. The said power can never be termed as an administrative power of the Revenue Officer”.J&K Transfer Of Property Act | Buyer's Possession Only Permissive, Doesn't Convert To Ownership Till Property Is Registered: High CourtCase Title: Shani Devi Vs Fr. Tomi Principal Christ SchoolCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 48The Jammu and Kashmir High Court clarified that under the J&K Transfer of Property Act 1977, the execution of a contract for sale or agreement to sell does not automatically transfer ownership rights to the buyer. Instead, the title remains with the seller, even if the buyer has taken possession of the property, it emphasised.Justice Javed Iqbal Wani highlighted that possession by the buyer under such agreements is permissive and does not constitute a transfer of an interest in the property. This means that until the property is registered under the Registration Act, the buyer does not acquire ownership rights, he...

Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup March 18 - March 24, 2024

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags