MST. SAIMA MS. RUKHSANA KHAN vs KHALID AHMAD BAKAL AND OTHERS — CM(M)/194/2026

Case under Article 227-Section 104 Section 227. Disposed: Contested--Dismised on 03rd June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: JKHC010026182026

Filing Number

CM(M)/1990/2026

Filing Date

01-Jun-2026

Registration No

CM(M)/194/2026

Registration Date

01-Jun-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.A. Chowdhary

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.A. Chowdhary

Bench Type

SINGLE BENCH

Category

SB MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL CASES ( 125 )

Sub-Category

QUASHMENT OF ORDER ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

CIVIL CASES (C)

Decision Date

03-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismised

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Article 227-Section 104 Section 227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MST. SAIMA MS. RUKHSANA KHAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KHALID AHMAD BAKAL AND OTHERS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 03-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.A. ChowdharyView PDF

    The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir dismissed Mst. Saima's petition challenging a lower court's interim custody order that awarded the younger child (15 months) to the mother and the elder child (5 years) to the father. The court found the petition not maintainable, holding that the petitioner should have pursued a statutory appeal under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, to the Sessions Court, and that a pending guardianship petition under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, provided an adequate alternative remedy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 03-Jun-2026

    For Admission Fresh

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.A. Chowdhary

  4. 01-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CM(M)/194/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir dismissed Mst. Saima's petition challenging a lower court's interim custody order that awarded the younger child (15 months) to the mother and the elder child (5 years) to the father. The court found the petition not maintainable, holding that the petitioner should have pursued a statutory appeal under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, to the Sessions Court, and that a pending guardianship petition under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, provided an adequate alternative remedy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case