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

XXXX Vs UT of J&K 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 66

Abdul Hamid Bhat Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 67

ARSHID AHMAD GANIE Vs UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR (HOME) 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 68

Peer Rattan Nath Mahant Sh. Shiv ji Maharaj Peer kho Vs Wazir Onkar Singh 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 69

Meena Kumari vs Sainik Cooperative House Society Ltd 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 70

Bilal Hassan Anim vs Shafeeq Ahmad Mir 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 71

Manzoor Ahmad Wani vs Union Territory of J&K 2025 LiveLaw(JKL) 72

Sadiya Sidiq Lone vs UT of J&K and others 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 73

FEROZ AHMAD ZARGAR & OTHERS vs UT OF J&K AND OTHERS 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 74

Mohd Altaf Najar Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 75

Parvaiz Ahmad Fashoo Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 76

Farooq Ahmad Janda vs Union Of India 2025 Livelaw JKL) 77

Judgments/Orders:

Right To Life Includes Living Without Mental Trauma: J&K High Court Allows Termination Of 28-Week Pregnancy Of Minor Sexual Assault Victim

Case-Title: xxxx vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 66

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court allowed the termination of the 28–29-week fetus of a sexual assault victim through the applicable medical intervention. The court recognized the severe mental trauma suffered by the victim and her inability to comprehend or cope with childbirth.

[NDPS Act] Not For Accused To Prove Seized Samples Were Not In Safe Custody, Burden Lies On Prosecution To Establish Safe Handling: J&K High Court

Case Title: Abdul Hamid Bhat Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 67

Underscoring the importance of procedural compliance in narcotics cases, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has held that it is not for the accused to prove that seized samples were not in safe custody, rather, the burden lies on the prosecution to establish their safe handling and ensure that tampering was impossible.

Rigors Of Bail U/S 37 Of NDPS Act Will Not Apply In Cases Of Intermediate Quantity: J&K High Court

Case Title: ARSHID AHMAD GANIE vs UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR (HOME),

Citation: 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 68

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that the rigors of bail under the NDPS Act will not apply where the contraband in question is of intermediate quantity. The court observed that the quantity recovered from the accused persons fell within the intermediate category and not the commercial quantity attracting the rigors of Section 37 of the Act.

'Any Person' Includes All Resisting Possession, Executing Courts Empowered To Adjudicate Obstruction Claims Under O.21 R.97 CPC: J&K High Court

Case Title: Peer Rattan Nath Mahant Sh. Shiv ji Maharaj Peer kho Vs Wazir Onkar Singh

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 69

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh reaffirmed the broad jurisdiction of executing courts under Order 21 Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). The Court presided by Justice Javed Iqbal Wani held that the term "any person" in Rule 97(1) is deliberately broad to include all individuals who resist or obstruct possession, empowering executing courts to adjudicate such disputes within the execution proceedings itself.

Party Cannot Be Forced To Accept Arbitrator Who Has Conflict Of Interest, Violates Principles Of Natural Justice And Fair Trial: J&K High Court

Case Title: Meena Kumari vs Sainik Cooperative House Society Ltd,

Citation: 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 70

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that a party could not be forced to accept an arbitrator who has a conflict of interest, as the same would violate the principles of a fair trial. The court held that the Perpetual Lease Deed, as well as the Byelaws, which provide for the Registrar, Cooperative Societies to be the sole arbitrator for adjudicating disputes between the petitioner and the department, would be against the law.

Moratorium Period Under IBC Does Not Bar Payment Of Compensation Under NI Act: J&K High Court Orders ₹4 Crore Interim Compensation

Case Title: Bilal Hassan Anim vs Shafeeq Ahmad Mir

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 71

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that the declaration of a moratorium would not bar the complainant from filing a complaint under the NI Act. The court said that the debtor cannot take refuge under the Code to frustrate proceedings under the NI Act if he is found liable to pay compensation in the proceedings.

Preventive Detention Cannot Be Used As A Short-Cut Method When Cancellation Of Bail Is An Available Remedy: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Manzoor Ahmad Wani vs Union Territory of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw(JKL) 72

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that the prosecution's failure to seek cancellation of bail and instead using preventive detention as a shortcut to put the accused behind bars is not legally sustainable.

EWS Certificate Cannot Be Rejected Based On Mutation Records But Only After Due Inquiry Into Eligibility Criteria: J&K High Court

Case Title: Sadiya Sidiq Lone vs UT of J&K and others

Citation: 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 73

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that the EWS certificate could not be rejected merely by relying on mutation records. The court stated that a due inquiry must be conducted as to the eligibility criteria, wherein the applicant is given the right to a hearing before deciding the said application.

Trial Court Has No Inherent Powers To Recall Or Review Its Own Final Order: J&K High Court

Case Title: FEROZ AHMAD ZARGAR & OTHERS vs UT OF J&K AND OTHERS

Citation: 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 74

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that it is not open to the trial court to review its own final orders. The court held that in such cases, the only option available to the aggrieved party is to challenge the said order before the High Court.

“No Incident Beyond S.107 CrPC Proceedings, Vague Allegations": J&K High Court Quashes Detention Of Alleged Terror Sympathiser

Case Title: Mohd Altaf Najar Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 75

Quashing the preventive detention of one Mohd. Altaf Najar, a B.Tech graduate from Pulwama, detained under the Public Safety Act (PSA) as an alleged terror sympathizer the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court found that the detention was based solely on proceedings initiated under Section 107 CrPC, with no concrete incidents or allegations linking the detenue to any terrorist activities.

Unexplained Delay In Issuing Preventive Detention Order Casts Doubt On Magistrate's Subjective Satisfaction: J&K High Court

Case Title: Parvaiz Ahmad Fashoo Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 76

Underscoring the sanctity of procedural fairness the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that “delay, unless satisfactorily explained in making a preventive detention order, throws considerable doubt on the genuineness of the subjective satisfaction” of the detaining authority.

Two Decades Of Continuous Services Doesn't Give Right Of Regularization Unless Formal Recruitment Process Is Followed: J&K High Court

Case Title: Farooq Ahmad Janda vs Union Of India

Citation: 2025 Livelaw JKL) 77

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that serving in a department for more than 20 years without following the due process of recruitment does not give the right to said employee to seek the regularization of services.