Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Monthly Digest: April 2025

M/s Devyani International Limited vs Airport Authority of India and others 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 127

Rattan Chand & Ors vs UT OF J&K & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 128

Mohd Iqbal Koka Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 129

Mohammad Imran Ganai And Anr. Vs Government Through Police Station Dangiwacha 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 130

Chief Engineer PW(R&B) Department and another vs M/s Abdul Salam Mir 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 131

Dr. Rajeev Gupta vs U.T. of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 132

Dogra Sangathan Vs State of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 133

Javaid Ahmad Bhat Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 134

UT Of J&K Vs Ghulam Nabi Itoo & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 135

UT of J&K through its Commissioner vs Kashmiri Lal 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 136

Adil Hussain Mir vs UT of JK and others 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 137

Aditya Malhotra vs Dharminder Singh 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 138

HC/GD Harish Chander vs UOI and others 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 139

Suresh Kumar Rekhi vs Directorate of Enforcement 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 140

Mumtaz Ahmed th. Nisar Ahmed Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 141

Palm Island Space Owners Welfare Association & Ors vs Union of India and others 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 142

Susheel Kumar Rana and others Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 143

Anil Gupta and another vs Union Territory of J&K and another 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 144

ABDUL RAHEEM BHAT (Senior Citizen) vs BEAUTY JAN AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 145

Hakim Nazir Ahmad Vs Commissioner SMC 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 146

Abdul Hamid vs UT OF J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 147

Abdul Hamid vs Union of India and Anr 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 148

State of Jammu and Kashmir vs Gurmeet Singh and Anr 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 149

Mohd Ismail Koka Vs State of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 150

Vishal Verma vs Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 151

State of J&K vs Ishtiyaq Ali 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 152

Kuldeep Sharma vs UT if J&K &Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 153

Abdul Gani and another vs UT of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 154

Gulzar Begum and another vs Raja Begum and others 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 155

Sita Ram vs UT if J&K &Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 156

Falaq Mukhtar Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 157

Anil Kumar Yadav Vs Directorate of Enforcement 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 158

Ranjit Kour & Another Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 159

Anamika Devi Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 160

Dinesh Kumar Vs UT Of Leh 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 161

Mohammad Shafiq Dar vs Union Territory of J&K & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 162

Abdul Majid Bhat vs Gulzar Ahmad Bhat 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 163

Jammu Cooperative House Building Society Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 164

Rahil Chowdhary Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 165

Tsewang Thinles Vs UT Of Ladakh 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 166

J&K HORTICULTURE PRODUCE MARKETING AND PROCESSING CORPORATION Vs ABDUL RAZAK MALLA & OTHERS 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 167

Judgments/Orders:

No Absolute Right To Bypass Mandatory Pre-Litigation Mediation By Seeking Urgent Interim Relief Without Reasonable Grounds: J&K High Court

Case-Title: M/s Devyani International Limited vs Airport Authority of India and others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 127

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that under the Commercial Courts Act, a party does not have an absolute choice to bypass the statutorily mandated pre-litigation mediation by praying for interim relief without justifying the same with reasonable grounds.

Publishing Notice Only In English Newspaper Without Giving Mandatory Notice In Regional Language Vitiates Land Acquisition Proceedings: J&K HC

Case-Title:- Rattan Chand & Ors vs UT OF J&K & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 128

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled that not publishing the notices as provided under the land acquisition Act for the benefit of the occupants of the land by publishing the notices in local language at conspicuous places vitiates the entire acquisition proceedings.

Failure To Communicate Rejection Of Detenue's Representation In Time Vitiates Detention Order: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohd Iqbal Koka Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 129

Emphasizing the importance of procedural safeguards in preventive detention cases, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the government's failure to communicate the rejection of a detenue's representation in a time-bound manner is sufficient to vitiate the detention order.

Plea Of Non-Compliance With S.154 CrPC Need Not Be Looked At When Chargesheet Is Filed Disclosing Commission Of Offence: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Mohammad Imran Ganai And Anr. Vs Government Through Police Station Dangiwacha

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 130

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court observed that the requirement of checking the non-compliance of the provisions of section 154 CrPC was not needed at the stage when the investigation in the matter was complete and chargesheet had already been filed disclosing the commission of the cognizable offence.

Delay In Receiving Award Due To Default In Paying Arbitral Fees Cannot Be Held Against Party Seeking To Challenge Award While Calculating Limitation: J&K HC

Case-Title: Chief Engineer PW(R&B) Department and another vs M/s Abdul Salam Mir

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 131

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that since the delivery of a signed copy of the arbitral award was the mandatory requirement under the arbitration act therefore, the limitation for challenging the said award would arise only after the said signed copy is received by the party seeking to challenge the same.

PSC Has No Locus To Defend Selection Process When Candidate Whose Appointment Was Set Aside By CAT Chose Not To Agitate Matter: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Dr. Rajeev Gupta vs U.T. of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 132

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court dismissed a review petition filed by the J&K Public Service Commission, holding that a constitutional body had no locus standi in defending a selection which was set aside by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), considering the fact that the candidate whose appointment was set aside had not bothered to agitate the issue.

"No Evidence Of Illegal Activities": J&K High Court Dismisses PIL Alleging Exploitation Of Women, Illegal Acts At Adhyatmik Vishva Vidyalaya

Case Title: Dogra Sangathan Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 133

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) alleging illegal activities, including exploitation and confinement of women, at the centres of Adhyatmik Vishva Vidyalaya run by spiritual leader Virender Dev Dikshit.

The bench, comprising Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice M A Chowdhary concluded that the petition lacked merit after a thorough investigation by multiple committees and senior government officials.

J&K High Court Denies Bail To Hotelier Who Allegedly Harbored Foreign Terrorists, Provided Them SIM Cards

Case Title: Javaid Ahmad Bhat Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 134

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed the bail plea of Javaid Ahmad Bhat, a Srinagar-based hotelier accused of sheltering two foreign terrorists in his hotel and residence, and facilitating their activities by arranging SIM cards.

Officers Cannot Claim Seniority Based On Unfilled Vacancies From Previous Years, Actual Date Of Promotion Only Valid Criterion For Hierarchy: J&K HC

Case Title: UT Of J&K Vs Ghulam Nabi Itoo & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 135

Clarifying the fundamental principles governing bureaucratic promotions, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court decisively ruled that administrative officers cannot claim seniority based on unfilled vacancies from previous years, establishing that the actual date of promotion remains the only valid criterion for determining service hierarchy.

SRO Benefits Wrongfully Granted To Employee Cannot Be Recovered By Withdrawing Amounts From Salary: J&K High Court

Case-Title: UT of J&K through its Commissioner vs Kashmiri Lal

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 136

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that if benefits under Self-Regulatory Organisation (SRO) scheme is wrongfully granted to the employee by the department without any fraud or misrepresentation played by the employee, the department is not at liberty to recover the same by effecting it from the salary of the employee or pensioner at any given point of time.

Accused Cannot Be Put Under Preventive Detention On Grounds That Releasing Him On Bail Affects Public Confidence: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Adil Hussain Mir vs UT of JK and others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 137

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that mere fact that a person has secured bail from the court cannot be grounds for imposing preventive detention on the pretext of an apprehension that enlargement of the detenu will have an impact upon public faith.

Complainant Does Not Acquiesce To Jurisdiction Under NI Act By Merely Participating In Proceedings Or Negotiating A Settlement: J&K High Court

Case Title: Aditya Malhotra vs Dharminder Singh

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 138

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that merely because the complainant participated in the proceedings by giving evidence on affidavit before the trial magistrate not having the jurisdiction to try the case does not mean he has acquiesced to the jurisdiction of the court.

Compulsory Retirement Valid For Leaving Battalion Without Informing About New Address, Employer Cannot Launch 'Manhunt' For Employee: J&K HC

Case Title: HC/GD Harish Chander vs UOI and others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 139

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court upheld the order of compulsory retirement from the service imposed upon the petitioner for his continuous absence from the battalion without permission for overstaying his leave for the period of 326 days.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed that “An employer is not expected to launch a manhunt for an absconding employee in the whole world. It is enough if an employer sends the communications to an absconding employee at his residential address. This is what has been done by the respondents as well as the Inquiry Officer in the present case. Therefore, it cannot be stated that the Inquiry Officer has not followed either the procedure prescribed under the CRPF Rules, or the principles of natural justice”

Filing List Of Documents In Chargesheet Not Substantial Compliance With S.294 CrPC: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Suresh Kumar Rekhi vs Directorate of Enforcement

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 140

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has held that merely filing a list of documents is not substantial compliance with Section 294 CrPC.

The Court held that it was necessary to give notice to the adverse party by providing them the list of the documents which are sought to be admitted or denied by the adverse party as per the section 330 of BNSS, which is equivalent of section 294 of Crpc, to ensure that the party is aware of the documents the said party has been called upon to admit or deny.

Non-Disclosure Of Confidential Intel In Public Interest Doesn't Violate Detenu's Rights: J&K High Court Upholds Detention Order

Case Title: Mumtaz Ahmed th. Nisar Ahmed Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 141

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a habeas corpus petition challenging the preventive detention under the Public Safety Act (PSA), observing that not furnishing confidential information to the detenu, which would have been against public interest, cannot be construed as a violation of constitutional or statutory rights.

Questions On Whether Infrastructural Project Would Be Technically Feasible Or Serve Larger Public Interest Are Beyond Scope Of Judicial Review: J&K HC

Case-Title: Palm Island Space Owners Welfare Association & Ors vs Union of India and others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 142

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that merits of the contention raised by the petitioner as to the feasibility or viability of the infrastructural project by the government cannot be looked into by this court as it is not an appellate authority over the expert decisions regarding the project costs, provisions for entry/exit points, safety, technical feasibility of the project, and the related aspects.

Mere Existence Of Civil Remedy For Breach Of Contract No Grounds To Quash Cheating Case In Absence Of Mala Fides: J&K High Court

Case Title: Susheel Kumar Rana and others Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 143

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that the presence of a civil remedy does not, by itself, justify quashing of criminal proceedings unless the allegations in the complaint fail to disclose an offence or the proceedings are found to be malicious.

“.. mere fact that complaint relates to a commercial transaction or breach of contract, for which a civil remedy is available, is not by itself a ground to quash the criminal proceedings. It is only if it is shown that the complaint even if taken at its face value does not disclose commission of any offence or if it is found that criminal proceedings have been initiated with mala fides/malice for wreaking vengeance that the same can be quashed”, Justice Sanjay Dhar observed.

Incomplete Disclosure Of Material Facts To Superintendent Of Police Not Strict Compliance With S.154 CrPC: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Anil Gupta and another vs Union Territory of J&K and another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 144

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that not disclosing the material facts to the superintendent of police or annexing the duly sworn affidavit of the person who had made an oral complaint does not demonstrate strict compliance with section 154 CrPC for the purpose of invoking the jurisdiction of the court under section 156(3) CrPC.

Daughter Not Suffering From Any Physical Or Mental Abnormality Cannot Claim Maintenance From Father: J&K High Court

Case-Title: ABDUL RAHEEM BHAT (Senior Citizen) vs BEAUTY JAN AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 145

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court unburdened the liability fastened upon a father by virtue of a maintenance order passed under section 488 of the erstwhile Jammu and Kashmir CrPC Act by the trial magistrate ordering him to pay maintenance to his major able-bodied daughters six years ago.

The court held that two unmarried major daughters who were able-bodied and did not suffer from any physical or mental disability were not entitled to receive maintenance by invoking 488 of CrPC by any stretch of claim or reasoning.

Courts' Legitimacy Must Be Established On Reasons: J&K High Court Recommends Refresher Course For Judicial Officer Over Unreasoned Order

Case Title: Hakim Nazir Ahmad Vs Commissioner SMC

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 146

Reasserting the fundamental principle that judicial legitimacy flows from reasoned decision-making, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has come down heavily on a trial court judge for passing a cryptic, unreasoned order under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul not only set aside the impugned order but also directed that the concerned Presiding Officer be deputed for a refreshment course through the J&K Judicial Academy.

Contraband Recovered Individually From Accused Persons Travelling Together Has To Be Considered Separately At Stage Of Bail: J&K High Court

Case Title: Abdul Hamid vs UT OF J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 147

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that contraband recovered from accused persons individually, even when they are travelling together, has to be considered separately for each accused for the purpose for the bail.

'No Objection' For Issuance Of Passport To Accused Can Only Be Granted By Court Before Which Criminal Proceedings Are Pending: J&K High Court

Case Title: Abdul Hamid vs Union of India and Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 148

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that the person against whom the criminal proceedings are pending can be granted passport if the concerned criminal court grants the 'no-objection' for the issuance of the passport as per the provisions of the act.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar held that the pendency of the criminal case can form the basis for rejecting the issuance/renewal of passport but if the concerned court before which the proceedings are pending gives it the nod and grants no objection to the accused, the same can be issued/renewed by the passport office.

Failure To Show Safe Custody Of Seized Contraband & Existing Contradictions In Evidence Sufficient To Acquit Accused In NDPS Case: J&K High Court

Case Title: State of Jammu and Kashmir vs Gurmeet Singh and Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 149

Acquitting the accused persons under section 8/15 of the NDPS Act the Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that failure to show safe-custody of the contraband seized, inability to record statements of crucial witnesses and contradictions in the statements of the witnesses shows that prosecution miserably failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.

J&K High Court Quashes FIR In Matrimonial Dispute Citing Mutual Settlement, Says S. 528 BNSS Overrides S. 359

Case Title: Mohd Ismail Koka Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 150

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, while invoking its inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) has held that the provision has an overriding effect and is not to be read as subject to Section 359 of the BNSS (corresponding to Section 320 of the CrPC).

Justice Mohammad Yousuf Wani thus quashed an FIR registered under Sections 452 (trespass) and 376B (marital rape) of the IPC, emphasizing that the extraordinary powers under Section 528 can be exercised to secure the ends of justice, especially in matrimonial disputes where parties have amicably settled.

Contractors Are Liable To Pay GST At Rate Prevalent On Day Of Receipt Of Tender, Not When Work Is Allotted: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Vishal Verma vs Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 151

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that the contractors were liable to pay GST at a rate prevalent on the last day for the submission of the tenders and not when the work was allocated as the same was clear from the Special Condition No.49 existing in the contract agreement.

A bench of Justices Sanjeev Kumar, Justice Puneet Gupta observed that the review petitioner being a contracting party was bound by the terms of the contract which provides that tax rates as prevailing on the last due date for receipt of tenders will be applicable and in the absence of any challenge to above provision at any point of time the arguments presented were unsustainable.

No Complaints Of Cruelty During 30-Yr Marriage, Absence Of Incriminating Proof: J&K High Court Upholds Husband's Acquittal In Abetment Case

Case-Title: State of J&K vs Ishtiyaq Ali

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 152

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that in the absence of any substantial and credible evidence or any prior complaints, FIRs, or consistent testimony of cruelty over the 30-year marriage, it cannot be proved that the accused has abetted or instigated the commission of suicide of his deceased wife.

Arms License Issuing Authority Must Procure Police Report & Conduct Enquiry Before Rejecting License Despite Multiple FIRs: J&K High Court

Case-Title:- Kuldeep Sharma vs UT if J&K &Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 153

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that even if there are multiple FIRs against the applicant seeking renewal of his arms license, the licensing authority is bound by statute to call for the police verification report from the concerned police station before refusing to renew the arms license.

Land Acquisition Proceedings Lapse If Award Is Not Passed Within 2 Years Of Declaration Being Made: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Abdul Gani and another vs UT of J&K,

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 154

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that if no award is passed within two years after the declaration is made, the entire land acquisition proceedings shall stand lapsed unless stayed by the court.

Civil Courts Cannot Adjudicate Disputes Over Determination Of Right To Possess Land Under Agrarian Land Reforms Act: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Gulzar Begum and another vs Raja Begum and others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 155

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that where in a suit right to possession is claimed or disputed and it is referable to the officer or the authority appointed under the Agrarian Reforms Act, the Civil Court is debarred from settling such a dispute.

Higher Salary Mistakenly Credited To Employee Cannot Be Recovered, But Employee Cannot Seek Continuation Of Erroneous Benefits: J&K High Court

Case-Title:- Sita Ram vs UT if J&K &Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 156

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that the claim of the petitioners to avail the benefit of a mistake of fact, despite the mistake having been detected and corrected, is totally misconceived and cannot be accepted.

J&K HC Dismisses Plea Challenging Dental College Recruitment, Says Candidates Who Participated Without Protest Cannot Subsequently Challenge Process

Case Title: Falaq Mukhtar Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 157

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a petition challenging the Government Order No. 383-JK(HME) of 2024, which altered the selection criteria for Senior Residents/Registrars in Government Dental and Medical Colleges.

S.531 BNSS | Stage Of Proceedings Is Pivotal In Determining Applicability Of BNSS Or CRPC: J&K High Court Explains

Case Title: Anil Kumar Yadav Vs Directorate of Enforcement

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 158

Clarifying the legal framework regarding the applicability of the old and new criminal procedural laws, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that the relevant factor for determining the applicability of BNSS or CrPC, 1973, is the stage of the case prevailing immediately prior to 01.07.2024.

[S. 498a IPC] Cruelty Not Dependent On Suicide Or Self-Harm, Causing Grave Mental Or Physical Injury Sufficient To Attract Offence: J&K High Court

Case Title: Ranjit Kour & Another Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 159

Reinforcing the protective scope of Section 498A IPC, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, while rejecting two petitions seeking quashing of an FIR lodged under sections 498A and 109 IPC, held that “if the conduct of husband or his relatives is accompanied with an intention to cause grave injury to a woman, whether or not she was driven to commit suicide or inflict grave injury upon herself, is immaterial, it would amount to cruelty within the meaning of Section 498A IPC.”

Two Adults Choosing Each Other In Marriage Is A Constitutional Right, Consent Of Family Or Clan Not Necessary: J&K High Court

Case Title: Anamika Devi Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 160

Reinforcing individual autonomy and constitutional liberties, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, while disposing of a protection plea filed by a young married couple, ruled that two adults choosing each other in marriage is a constitutional right, not subject to family or community approval.

Statement Of Child Victims Susceptible In Imposing Atmosphere Of Courtroom: J&K HC Upholds Man's Sentence For Sexually Assaulting 4-Yr-Old

Case Title: Dinesh Kumar Vs UT Of Leh

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 161

The Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh High Court underscored the inherent vulnerability of child witnesses in courtroom settings while upholding the conviction of Dinesh Kumar for sexually assaulting a minor girl in Leh in the year 2017.

Submitting Invalid But Genuine Certificate In Recruitment Process Is Neither Fraud Nor Misrepresentation For Disqualifying Candidate: J&K High Court

Case-Title:Mohammad Shafiq Dar vs Union Territory of J&K & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 162

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that submitting a certificate issued by an unrecognised organisation could at best be considered as invalid for the purposes of recruitment but same does not amount to fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the candidate.

Registration Of Gift Deed Does Not Make It Valid Under Muslim Law Without Declaration Or Formal Acceptance Of Property: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Abdul Majid Bhat vs Gulzar Ahmad Bhat

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 163

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that merely because the gift under muslim law is a registered one does not obivate the possibility of the gift being invalid. The court said that what is important in muslim law while executing a gift deed is that all the essential conditions required to valid gift are present.

J&K Provident Fund Act | PF Coverage Without Gazette Notification Is 'Non Est' In Law: High Court

Case Title: Jammu Cooperative House Building Society Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 164

Reinforcing the legal sanctity of Gazette notifications for the applicability of labour welfare statutes, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that unless a notification under Subsection (4) of Section 1 of the Jammu and Kashmir Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1961 is issued and published in the Official Gazette, any proceedings regarding registration of a cooperative society under the Act are “non est in the eyes of law.”

Courts Cannot Conduct Comparative Study Of Natural Resource Allocation: J&K High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Mining Lease Cancellation

Case Title: Rahil Chowdhary Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 165

Reaffirming the judiciary's restraint in matters of policy, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, while dismissing a writ petition seeking cancellation of mining leases, held that courts cannot conduct a comparative study of methods for distribution of natural resources, as such decisions fall within the exclusive domain of the Executive.

POCSO Act | Section 34 Empowers Special Courts To Determine Age Of Both Offender & Victim: J&K High Court Remands Case For Fresh Age Inquiry

Case Title: Tsewang Thinles Vs UT Of Ladakh

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 166

Clarifying the jurisdiction of Special Courts under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO), the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the Special Court is empowered not just to determine the age of the accused, but also of the victim.

No Work No Pay Principle Inapplicable When Employee Is Kept Away Due to Employer's Act: J&K High Court

Case Title: J&K HORTICULTURE PRODUCE MARKETING AND PROCESSING CORPORATION Vs ABDUL RAZAK MALLA & OTHERS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 167

Reiterating a significant principle of employment law, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that the doctrine of "no work no pay" cannot be pressed into service when an employee is kept away from work by the act or omission of the employer.