1 S. No. 108 Suppl. Cause List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CRM(M) No. 287/2025 CrlM No. 671/2025 Azi and Ors. …Appellant/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Badrul Duja, Advocate Vs. Rubeena Akhter ...Respondent(s) Through: CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, JUDGE O R D E R 31.05.2025 1. Quashing of Order dated 31.07.2024 passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Chadoora (for short “JMIC), whereby petitioners were directed to pay Rs.30,000/-, (Rs.10,000/- by each of the petitioners) as medical expenses to respondent so that she could undergo for Ortho Surgery in her hand and Order dated 17.05.2025 passed by the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Budgam (for short “Sessions Court”) whereby revision petition has been dismissed, are sought for in this petition under Section 528 BNSS. 2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the order passed by JMIC is bad as it does not only direct husband but it also directs the mother-in-law and sister-in-law to pay Rs.10,000/- each to the respondent and that is why a revision petition was filed against that order. Although a request was made to treat revision as appeal, yet the Sessions Court passed order impugned dated 17.05.2025. 3. Heard and considered 2 4. Order of the Trial Court passed under and in terms of provisions of Domestic Violence Act was/is an appealable order under Section 29 of the Act. 5. Petitioners, admittedly, filed revision petition, which was not maintainable. They moved application for treating revision as appeal, but the Sessions Court dismissed it. The question that arises in the above backdrop is as to whether a revision petition filed by petitioners could have been on their application treated as appeal or not. Subsection (2) of Section 440 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) provides that where any proceeding by way of revision is commenced before a Sessions Judge under subsection (1), the provisions of subsections (2), (3), (4) and (5) of Section 442 shall, so far as may be, apply to such proceedings and references in the said subsections to the High Court shall be construed as references to the Sessions Judge. Subsection (5) of Section 442 BNSS provides that where under BNSS an appeal lies but an application for revision has been made to the High Court by any person and the High Court is satisfied that such application was made under the erroneous belief that no appeal lies thereto and that it is necessary in the interests of justice so to do, the High Court may treat the application for revision as a petition of appeal and deal with the same accordingly. 6. In the present case, the Sessions Court could have considered the application of petitioners thereby treating the revision as appeal and decide the same. Nevertheless, the Sessions Court proceeded to deal with the revision and held it not maintainable. Interference in view of provisions of Section 440 BNSS is called for. 3 7. For the reasons discussed above, impugned order dated 17.05.2025 passed by the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Budgam, is set-aside. The revision petition of petitioners is treated as Appeal, which shall be decided by the Sessions Court on its own merits. Till the appeal is decided by the Sessions Court, the order impugned dated 31.07.2024 qua petitioners 1&2 shall stay and insofar as impugned order dated 31.07.2024 qua petitioner no.3 is concerned, that shall be the domain of Sessions Court to consider in the interregnum. 8. The parties/petitioners shall cause their appearance before the Sessions Court on 18.06.2025. 9. Disposed of. (VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL) JUDGE SRINAGAR 31.05.2025 Manzoor Manzoor Ul Hassan Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Srinagar 06.06.2025 16:50