Jammu And Kashmir & Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up May 26 - June 1 2025

MOHAMMAD SHABAN GANAI & ANR Vs MUSHTAQ AHMAD RATHER 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 201

Rajinder Kumar vs State of J&K and Anr 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 202

Ashok Toshkhani vs UT of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 203

Mehmood Askari Vs Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 204

Niket Kansal Vs Union Of India Through ED 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 205

Anwar Hussain Wani & Ors vs State of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 206

Chairman, Peaks Auto Jammu Pvt. Ltd Vs Harmeet Kour and another 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 207

Adil Hamid Wani Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 208

Manzoor Ahmad Wani Vs Ayaz Ahmad Raina 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 209

Mst Zoona Begum vs Ghulam Mohammad Sheikh & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 210

Mubeen Ahmad Shah Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 211

Sheikh Showkat Vs Ghulam Jeelani Chesti & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 212

Sanjeev Gupta vs Central University of Jammu 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 213

Haleema Tramboo Vs UT Of J&K, Himalayan Welfare Organization Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 214

Aamina & Ors Vs Aamir Ahmad Mir & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 215

UT Of J&K Through P/s Chanapora Vs Sameer Ahmad Koka 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 216

Judgments/Orders:

Interim Directions Under Order 39 Rule I & II Of CPC Cannot Be Passed Against Non-Parties: J&K High Court

Case Title: MOHAMMAD SHABAN GANAI & ANR Vs MUSHTAQ AHMAD RATHER

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 201

Reinforcing procedural rigour in civil litigation, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that interim directions under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) cannot be passed against a person who is not a party to the suit or appeal.

J&K High Court Quashes Rape Case Against Man After Seven-Year Relationship; Says Allegations Emerged Only After Marriage Refusal

Case-Title: Rajinder Kumar vs State of J&K and Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 202

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashed FIR registered against a man accused of rape and criminal intimidation, citing the delayed complaint and the long-term consensual relationship shared between the parties.

Revenue Officer Has No Jurisdiction Over Urban Residential Property Under J&K Land Revenue Act: High Court Quashes Partition Order

Case Title: Ashok Toshkhani vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 203

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that urban residential property falls outside the scope of the J&K Land Revenue Act, 1996, and quashed an order passed by a revenue officer attempting to partition such a property.

A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed that section 105 of the Act empowers a revenue officer for partition of land used for agriculture or related purpose, including structures and trees thereon while excluding sites of buildings in a town or village abadi or land appurtenant thereto.

IT Act | Tax Exemption U/S 10(26) Not Allowed Without Proof Of Living & Earning In Specified Area: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mehmood Askari Vs Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 204

Clarifying the scope of income tax exemption under Section 10(26) of the Income Tax Act, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that the benefit under this provision is not automatic and can only be claimed when an assessee clearly proves residence in the specified tribal area and demonstrates that the income was actually earned from sources located therein.

Discharge In Predicate Offence Does Not Invalidate PMLA Proceedings U/S 3 Of Act: J&K High Court

Case Title: Niket Kansal Vs Union Of India Through ED

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 205

Upholding the autonomy of proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that a discharge or acquittal in the predicate (scheduled) offence does not automatically invalidate money laundering investigations or summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Quashes Seniority Benefits For Rehbar-E-Taleem Teachers Prior To Regularization Of Services

Case-Title: Anwar Hussain Wani & Ors vs State of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 206

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that seniority of ReT (Rehbar-E-Taleem) teachers must be reckoned from the date of appointment as a general line teacher and the pre-regularization period of five years will not be included for the purpose of fixing seniority.

Consumer Compensation Or Replacement U/S 14 Of Consumer Protection Act Requires Conclusive Proof Of Deficient Service: J&K High Court

Case Title: Chairman, Peaks Auto Jammu Pvt. Ltd Vs Harmeet Kour and another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 207

Reinforcing a critical principle under consumer law, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that for an award of compensation or replacement of goods under Section 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, it must be conclusively established that the service provider was negligent or deficient in service.

Breach Of Fiduciary Trust By Manager Cannot Be Taken Lightly: J&K High Court Denies Bail in ₹71 Lakh Embezzlement Case

Case Title: Adil Hamid Wani Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 208

Taking strong exception to the alleged abuse of fiduciary trust, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh refused to grant anticipatory bail to a petrol pump manager accused of defrauding his employer of over ₹71 lakh.

CPC | “Sufficient Grounds” Under Order 23 Rule 1(3)(b) Grants Court Wide Discretion To Permit Withdrawal & Filing Of Fresh Suit: J&K High Court

Case Title: Manzoor Ahmad Wani Vs Ayaz Ahmad Raina

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 209

Clarifying the scope of “sufficient grounds” under Order 23 Rule 1(3)(b) of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that the expression grants wide judicial discretion to trial courts to permit withdrawal of a suit with liberty to institute a fresh one.

When Status Quo Order Is Passed Over Possession Of Suit Property, Party In Possession Can Raise Construction On Their Share: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mst Zoona Begum vs Ghulam Mohammad Sheikh & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 210

The Jammu and Kashmir Highcourt held that where the status quo order passed by the court is qualified by the word "possession" and not a blanket status quo order, there is no restraint on the parties to the suit on raising construction on the portion of property which is in their respective possession.

J&K High Court Declines Man's Plea Against FIR Over Social Media Posts Calling For Violence Against Non-Kashmiri's Living In Kashmir Valley

Case Title: Mubeen Ahmad Shah Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 211

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh dismissed a plea challenging the registration of FIR against one Mubeen Ahmad Shah, who was accused of uploading a series of Facebook posts that allegedly incited communal tensions and undermined national integrity.

Magistrate Cannot Postpone Decision On Third Party Ownership Objections U/S 84 Of CrPC Until After Attachment Is Executed: J&K High Court

Case Title: Sheikh Showkat Vs Ghulam Jeelani Chesti & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 212

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that a Magistrate is legally obligated to adjudicate objections filed under Section 84 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) by third parties before an attachment order under Section 83 CrPC is carried out. Any postponement of such adjudication pending physical attachment or receipt of compliance reports is contrary to law, the court ruled.

Withdrawal Of Earlier Notification For Departmental Promotion & Issuing Fresh Notification Under Amended Rules Is Not Mala Fide: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Sanjeev Gupta vs Central University of Jammu

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 213

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that the university can issue a fresh notification for initiating the departmental promotions under amended rules pending the finalization of the process of promotion issued under the previous rules.

J&K High Court Upholds 1944 Land Exchange Order, Says Vested Rights Cannot Be Undone By Administrative Inertia

Case Title: Haleema Tramboo Vs UT Of J&K, Himalayan Welfare Organization Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 214

Safeguarding the sanctity of long-standing administrative decisions and vested rights, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, upheld the enforceability of Government Order No. 60-C of 1944 and directed authorities to process the construction permission for land exchanged under the said order provided such land is not under dense plantation and is otherwise permissible under the Pahalgam Master Plan 2032.

BNSS | Interlocutory Notice Does Not Decide Rights Of Parties, S.438 Bars Revisional Jurisdiction Against Such Orders: J&K High Court

Case Title: Aamina & Ors Vs Aamir Ahmad Mir & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 215

Interpreting the provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that an order merely issuing notice in a proceeding is interlocutory in nature and, therefore, not amenable to revisional jurisdiction.

No Statutory Bar On Granting Bail U/S 13 Of UAPA As Restrictions U/S 43-D(5) Do Not Apply: J&K High Court Clarifies

Case Title: UT Of J&K Through P/s Chanapora Vs Sameer Ahmad Koka

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 216

Shedding light on the contours of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that there exists no statutory embargo on granting bail under Section 13 of the UAPA, as the stringent restrictions imposed under Section 43-D(5) of the Act are inapplicable to offences falling outside Chapters IV and VI.