Petition challenging a domestic violence order faced a preliminary objection of maintainability, as Section 29 appeal remedy was available. Counsel sought withdrawal; the court dismissed the petition as withdrawn with liberty to appeal within two weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
S. No. 40 Regular Cause List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
CM(M)/450/2025
MEHRAJ UD DIN SHERA
…Appellant/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Sheikh Feroz, Advocate
Vs.
RUKSANA RASHID
...Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Salih Pirzada, Advocate
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, JUDGE
O R D E R
12.12.2025
A preliminary objection has been raised regarding the maintainability of the present petition on the ground that an alternate efficacious remedy under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act is available, but instead of availing the said remedy, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 227, which is not maintainable at this stage.
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the appellate Court in terms of Section 29 of the Act.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as sought for. The petitioner shall be at liberty to challenge the impugned order before the appellate Court within a period of two weeks from today irrespective of the period of limitation provided under the Act.
(VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL) JUDGE
SRINAGAR 12.12.2025 Shabroz
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition under Section 227 was maintainable when an alternate remedy under Section 29 of the DV Act was available?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mehraj Ud Din Shera
Ruksana Rashid
Vinod Chatterji Koul
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 227 of the Constitution invoking the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate civil courts.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
