S. No.55

Regular List

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT SRINAGAR

CM(M) No.69/2024

CM(1156/2024) CM(7417/2024)

Date of pronouncement:15.12.2025

Uploaded on: 17.12.2025

TASLEEM ARIF DAR AND ORS.

…..Petitioner(s)

Through: Mr.Salih Pirzada, Advocate.

V/s

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

… ..Respondent(s)

Through : Mr. J.H.Reshi, Advocate

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE

JUDGMENT(Oral)

1. Through the medium of present petition the petitioners have

challenged application filed by respondent No.4 against them under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (hereinafter referred to be as “the D.V.Act”) which is stated to be pending before the Court of 2^nd Additional Munsiff (Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Srinagar)

(hereinafter for short “the trial Magistrate”).

2. As per case of the petitioners, petitioner No.1 is the husband,

petitioner No.2 is the mother-in-law, petitioner No.3 is the sister-in-law, petitioner No.4 is the brother-in-law and petitioner No.5 is also the brother-in-law of respondent No.4,

who live separately at the respective places of their residence. It has been submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the impugned proceedings.

3. According to the petitioners pursuant to the application under Section 12 filed by respondent No.4, an interim order dated 02.11.2023 came to be passed by learned Magistrate whereby petitioner No.1 was directed to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/- in favour of respondent No.4 and rest of the petitioners were restrained from committing any act of domestic violence against respondent No.4 and the Protection Officer was directed to investigate the matter and to file a detailed domestic incident report, who accordingly filed the report dated 11.11.2023. It has been further submitted that the petitioners filed objections to the impugned application stating therein that the monthly income of petitioner No.1 is Rs.7498/- and the children born out of the wedlock stay with petitioner No.1 and the allegations pertaining to rest of the petitioners were denied. The learned trial Magistrate vide order dated 02.02.2024 disposed of the interim application by reducing the maintenance amount to Rs.5000/- per month in favour of respondent No.4 and the direction passed against the rest of the petitioners was made absolute. It has been submitted that there was no instance of domestic violence or cruelty ever committed by the petitioners as respondent No.4 is not staying at the shared household since the year 2021 when she left the home on her own.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the material on record.

5. Respondent No.4 claiming herself to be the wife of petitioner No.1 has filed petition under Section 12 of the D.V.Act before learned trial Magistrate in which petitioners No.2 to 5, who happen to be the relatives of her husband (petitioner No.1), have also been arrayed as the respondents. In the application under Section 12 of the D.V.Act, the respondent has alleged that she is a victim of domestic violence, continuous harassment and torture at the hands of the petitioners, particularly petitioner No.1. She has pleaded that she has entered into a wedlock with petitioner No.1 in the year 2015 and out of said wedlock two children were born. It has been further pleaded that the petitioners on the very first day of marriage have started beating her and subjecting her to physical assault. She has further stated that she was thrown out of her house and was not allowed to take her children with her. She also submits that she is not able to maintain herself.

6. Per contra, the petitioners have averred in their objections to the application that respondent No.4 has filed baseless case as no act of domestic violence has been committed against her and that she has left the matrimonial home of her own. The petitioners have challenged the impugned petition on the main ground that no instance of domestic violence has taken place against respond