Jammu and Kashmir High Court
CM(M)/543/2025 of JAMEELA BEGUM (ALIAS ARJUMAND PARVEEN) Vs ABDUL WAHID BHAT (ALIAS WAHI MEHRAJ BHAT) AND ORS. on 9 December 2025
No. 35 Supplementary-1 Cause List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU& KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR [Through Virtual Mode] CM (M) No. 543/2025 CM No. 8202/2025 Caveat No. 2796/225 Jameela Begum (alias Arjumand Parveen) … Petitioner(s) Through: - Mr Syed Mohtasim, Advocate. V/s Abdul Wahid Bhat (alias
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Serial No. 35 Supplementary-1 Cause List
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU& KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
[Through Virtual Mode]
CM (M) No. 543/2025 CM No. 8202/2025 Caveat No. 2796/225
Jameela Begum (alias Arjumand Parveen) … Petitioner(s)
Through: - Mr Syed Mohtasim, Advocate.
V/s
Abdul Wahid Bhat (alias Wani Mehraj Bhat) and Ors. … Respondent(s) Through: - Mr Haseeb Shah Banday, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE M. A. CHOWDHARY, JUDGE.
(ORDER) 09.12.2025
Caveat No. 2796/2025:
01. With the appearance of Mr Haseeb Shah Banday, Advocate, on behalf of the Caveators/ Respondents, Caveat No. 2796/2025 shall stand discharged, accordingly.
CM (M) No. 543/2025; CM No. 8202/2025:
02. This Petition has been moved by the Petitioner seeking setting aside of Order dated 1st of November, 2025 passed by the Court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Srinagar in file No. Cr. Appeal/81/2025 as well as Order dated 2nd of August, 2025 passed by the Court of learned Forest Magistrate, Srinagar, primarily, on the ground that the Petitioner has been denied the residential rights in the shared accommodation in a petition under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.
03. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Petitioner has been residing in the house along with her husband, but the
Trial Court as well as Appellate Court have not protected her residential rights.
04. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner.
05. Notice.
06. Mr Haseeb Shah Banday, learned Advocate, enters appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the Respondents. He fairly concedes that the possessory rights of the Petitioner have been protected by a Civil Court in a declaratory Suit filed by the Petitioner herein, as such, the Petitioner should have no apprehension of being dispossessed.
07. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, coupled with the fact that the residence rights are with the Petitioner with regard to shared accommodation, in terms of the Order passed by the Civil Court in the civil declaratory Suit filed by the Petitioner herself, this Court is of the opinion that no further proceedings are required to be taken in this Petition and that the same can be disposed of leaving the parties free to contest the main Petition before the Court below.
08. Viewed thus this petition with consensual submissions is disposed of at this motion stage, with direction that till disposal of the main petition, petitioner shall not be evicted from the shared residential house. The orders impugned in this petition shall stand modified to this extent
09. Petition is, thus, disposed of on the above terms, along with the connected CM.
(M. A. CHOWDHARY)
JUDGE SRINAGAR December 9th, 2025 “TAHIR”
Tahir Manzoor Bhat I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document