- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- High Court of J & K and Ladakh
- /
- Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High...
Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 17 - February 23, 2025
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
25 Feb 2025 9:40 PM IST
Nominal Index:Ghulam Nabi Sofi VS State of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 41Union Territory of J&K vs Arsam Imtiyaz Malik 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 42Chairman, Building Operation Controlling Authority, Srinagar & Ors vs Jameel Hussain Farooqi & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 43Bashir Ahmad Mir Vs State Through P/s Safa Kadal 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 44Mohammad Abass Lone Vs Union Of India And Ors 2025...
Nominal Index:
Ghulam Nabi Sofi VS State of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 41
Union Territory of J&K vs Arsam Imtiyaz Malik 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 42
Chairman, Building Operation Controlling Authority, Srinagar & Ors vs Jameel Hussain Farooqi & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 43
Bashir Ahmad Mir Vs State Through P/s Safa Kadal 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 44
Mohammad Abass Lone Vs Union Of India And Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 45
Nagraj V Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 46
Abdul Rafi Baba & Anr vs Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 47
Mian Abdul Qayoom Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 48
Majid Hyderi Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 49
Syed Murtaza & ors vs Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 50
MOHAMMAD MAQBOOL vs State of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 51
Kashmir Valley Energy Private Limited & Anr Vs Mr.Bashir Ahmad Bhat 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 52
M/S NAVA HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD vs UT OF J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 53
Ahsan Ahmad Malik Vs Basharat Feroz Ganie 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 54
Judgments/Orders:
Case-Title: Ghulam Nabi Sofi VS State of J&K, 2025
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 41
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that the date of birth declared by a Government servant and thereafter recorded by the appropriate authority in the service book or any other record, shall not be subject to any alteration, except in the case of a clerical error, without the orders of the Government.
Case-Title : Union Territory of J&K vs Arsam Imtiyaz Malik, 2025
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 42
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that withdrawing the appointment order of an employee without conducting an inquiry is illegal, even if the said employee is in the probationary period. The court ruled that the mere pendency of a criminal case would not justify withdrawing the appointment without holding an inquiry.
Case-Title: Chairman, Building Operation Controlling Authority, Srinagar & Ors vs Jameel Hussain Farooqi & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 43
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has that unauthorized constructions cannot be validated by paying the compounding fees after such violations, even if a long period has elapsed since those violations. The court said that failure on the part of the competent authorities to act in a timely manner to prevent the violations cannot be a ground to condone these violations.
Case Title: Bashir Ahmad Mir Vs State Through P/s Safa Kadal
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 44
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that an offence under Section 353 RPC (assault or use of criminal force against a public servant) cannot be made out if the public servant is not acting lawfully or performing a duty imposed by law.
Case-Title: Mohammad Abass Lone Vs Union Of India And Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 45
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that the mere registration of an FIR or a pending investigation will not bar the authority from issuing or renewing the passport of the applicant. The court ruled that the authorities cannot refuse to issue or renew the passport unless the charge sheet is presented in the said case FIR.
Offence Being Part Of Commercial Transaction Alone Not Enough To Avoid Trial: J&K High Court
Case Title: Nagraj V Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 46
Dismissing a petition that sought the quashing of an FIR and charge sheet, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that merely because the offence was committed during the course of a commercial transaction, it would not suffice to conclude that the complaint does not warrant a trial. The truthfulness of the allegations in the complaint is to be determined based on the evidence presented during the trial in the complaint case, it added.
Case-Title: Abdul Rafi Baba & Anr vs Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 47
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court admitted a writ petition filed by the wife of a detainee and directed the Indian Embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia to file an affidavit regarding the current status of the petitioner who has been detained there under uncertain circumstances.
Case Title : Mian Abdul Qayoom Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 48
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed the habeas corpus petition filed by former Bar President Mian Abdul Qayoom, challenging his arrest in the high-profile murder case of Advocate Syed Babar Qadri. The court emphasized that the petitioner had been informed of the grounds of his arrest, affirming the procedural compliance by the authorities.
Case Title: Majid Hyderi Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 49
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that acts lacking a causal link with the imperative need to detain are liable to be quashed. Court noted that the allegations against the petitioner referenced old social media posts and news articles without proving an ongoing or imminent threat, rendering the preventive detention unsustainable.
Case-Title: Syed Murtaza & ors vs Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 50
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that a government department would be committing an illegality by usurping the quota meant to be filled by direct recruitment on the basis of merit through promotion. The court ruled that the government officials, in this case, had acted illegally by withdrawing as many as 29 out of 42 referred posts and filling them through promotion after the exam and interview for direct recruitment had already been conducted.
Case-title : MOHAMMAD MAQBOOL vs State of J&K, 2025
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 51
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that where a mutation is attested excluding a legal heir without recording the reasons for exclusion, such a mutation can be set aside. It also stated that an invalid mutation of the record can be challenged without any bar concerning the limitation period.
Case-Title: Kashmir Valley Energy Private Limited & Anr Vs Mr.Bashir Ahmad Bhat, 2025
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 52
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court directed the concerned state authorities to apprise the court about the status of exemption in paying of stamp duty by power project developing companies in J&K, engaged in setting up power projects under any policy.
Case-title : M/S NAVA HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD vs UT OF J&K
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 53
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that it is mandatory to conduct an inquiry before issuing process in a case where the accused is residing outside the jurisdiction of the magistrate court. The court held that in the present case, the Magistrate has not conducted any preliminary enquiry nor any investigation has been directed. The court held the impugned order as not sustainable in law.
Case-Title: Ahsan Ahmad Malik Vs Basharat Feroz Ganie, 2025
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 54
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that if a trial court does not consider an application for leave to defend a suit filed by the defendant on merits, the impugned judgment and decree become unsustainable in law.