Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up June 2 - June 8, 2025

Iftikhar Ashraf Trumboo vs Furqaan Ah. Rather 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 217

Thakur Ashwani Singh vs State of Punjab 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 218

Attiqa Bano Vs National Insurance Company Ltd 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 219

Tahir Riyaz Dar vs UT of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 220

Sajad Ahmad Khan Vs Union of India & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 221

Bhole Bhandari Charitable Trust Vs Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board Jammu/Srinagar 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 222

Chief Executive Officer and Anr Vs M/s Highlander Bar and Restaurant and Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 223

Shri Nav Durga Jhaleri Mata Trust vs UT of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 224

Mushtaq Ahmad Khan Vs UT of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 225

Judgments/Orders:

Refusal To Record Statement Of Bank's Authorised Representative In Cheque Dishonour Cases Is Liable To Be Set Aside: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Iftikhar Ashraf Trumboo vs Furqaan Ah. Rather

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 217

In a ruling aimed at streamlining cheque bounce proceedings, Jammu & Kashmir High Court set aside an order of the Trial Magistrate, Srinagar, which had refused to record the statement of an authorized bank representative in a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Writ Powers Limited By Article 226: J&K High Court Dismisses Plea Against Punjab Authorities Over Lack Of Territorial Jurisdiction

Case Title: Thakur Ashwani Singh vs State of Punjab

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 218

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court dismissed a writ petition filed against the State of Punjab and the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Jalandhar, on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

A bench of Justice Rahul Bharti observed that the petitioner self-invited the dismissal of this writ petition before it came to be filed. The court said that jurisdictional pleading is an essential prerequisite when targeting authorities outside a High Court's territorial domain.

S.100A Of CPC Overrides Letters Patent, No Further Appeal Lies Against Order Of Single Judge In Appellate Jurisdiction: J&K High Court

Case Title: Attiqa Bano Vs National Insurance Company Ltd

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 219

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held in clear terms that Section 100-A of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) has an overriding effect over Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, and bars the maintainability of any further appeal from a judgment passed by a Single Judge in exercise of appellate jurisdiction.

J&K High Court Upholds Detention Of Man Alleged To Be Associated With LeT, Says Detention Justified On Basis Of Conduct

Case-Title: Tahir Riyaz Dar vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 220

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court upheld a preventive detention order passed under the J&K Public Safety Act (PSA), ruling that the detaining authority's decision was based on application of mind, a reasonable assessment of future threat, and in accordance with constitutional and legal safeguards.

A bench of Justice Rajesh Sekhri observed that the grounds of detention, which included details of an FIR, past criminal conduct, and release from jail, indicated a conscious and informed application of mind by the detaining authority.

Impounding Passport Without Chargesheet Violates Fundamental Rights, Only FIR Does Not Constitute 'Pending Proceedings': J&K High Court

Case Title: Sajad Ahmad Khan Vs Union of India & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 221

Reaffirming the sanctity of constitutional rights, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that mere registration of a criminal case does not amount to proceedings prescribed under clause (e) of Section 10(3) of the Passports Act. Justice Sindhu Sharma observed that for proceedings to be treated as pending before a criminal court, a chargesheet must be filed, and not merely an FIR.

Writ Petitions Can't Be Withdrawn On A Whim: J&K High Court Rejects Charitable Trust's Plea For Fresh Petition In Amarnath Langer Dispute

Case Title: Bhole Bhandari Charitable Trust Vs Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board Jammu/Srinagar

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 222

In a stern ruling that underscores the sanctity of constitutional litigation, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, while rejecting an application seeking withdrawal of a writ petition with liberty to file afresh, held that the jurisdiction exercised under Article 226 of the Constitution is not shackled by procedural technicalities but nor is it an unregulated space for speculative or unjustified litigation maneuvers.

Liquor Trade A Privilege, Cannot Be Projected As Fundamental Right: J&K High Court Upholds Cantt Board's Power To Levy Enhanced License Fee

Case Title: Chief Executive Officer and Anr Vs M/s Highlander Bar and Restaurant and Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 223

Reinforcing the regulatory powers of Cantonment Boards, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar ruled that the business of selling liquor within cantonment areas is a privilege extended by the State, not a fundamental right.

A Division Bench comprising Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Sanjay Parihar upheld the authority of the Srinagar Cantonment Board to enhance license fees for liquor establishments, observing that such enhancement was not arbitrary or unreasonable.

"Live Provision Of Law Been Left Dead Letter": J&K High Court Expresses Concern Over Vacancy Of AG's Office Rendering S.92 CPC Ineffective

Case-Title: Shri Nav Durga Jhaleri Mata Trust vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 224

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court voiced serious concern over the prolonged absence of an Advocate General in the Union Territory, noting that this vacancy has effectively rendered Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 inoperative, particularly in matters involving charitable and religious institutions.

CCS (CCA) Rules | Once Delinquent Employee Unequivocally Admits To Charges, Full-Fledged Enquiry Is Not Necessary: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mushtaq Ahmad Khan Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 225

Reinforcing the principle that disciplinary proceedings need not culminate in an elaborate enquiry when the delinquent admits to the charges, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that once the delinquent employee unequivocally admits to the charges in disciplinary proceedings, a full-fledged enquiry involving oral evidence and cross-examination is not necessary.