ROUF AHMAD MIR AND OTHERS MR. G. M. SHAH vs ADFARA REHMAN — CRM(M)/277/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528. Disposed: Contested--Dismised on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: JKHC010020622026

Filing Number

CRM(M)/493/2026

Filing Date

05-May-2026

Registration No

CRM(M)/277/2026

Registration Date

05-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar

Bench Type

SINGLE BENCH

Category

SB MISC CRIMINAL CASES ( 112 )

Sub-Category

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT. ( 6 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL CASES (Cr)

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismised

Last updated 08-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ROUF AHMAD MIR AND OTHERS MR. G. M. SHAH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.ADFARA REHMAN

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay DharView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM(M) No.277/2026 The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir dismissed the petitioners' challenge to an appellate order that set aside the trial court's dismissal of a domestic violence petition. The court held that the trial magistrate improperly conducted a meticulous analysis of minor inconsistencies in the aggrieved person's testimony when the proper standard under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act requires only prima facie satisfaction of domestic relationship and likelihood of violence—not detailed evidence scrutiny. The appellate court correctly restored interim relief of Rs.5,000 monthly maintenance and residential accommodation/rent assistance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    For Admission Fresh

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar

  4. 05-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM(M)/277/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM(M) No.277/2026 The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir dismissed the petitioners' challenge to an appellate order that set aside the trial court's dismissal of a domestic violence petition. The court held that the trial magistrate improperly conducted a meticulous analysis of minor inconsistencies in the aggrieved person's testimony when the proper standard under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act requires only prima facie satisfaction of domestic relationship and likelihood of violence—not detailed evidence scrutiny. The appellate court correctly restored interim relief of Rs.5,000 monthly maintenance and residential accommodation/rent assistance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case