_____________________________________________________________________________________ CRM(M) No.450/2025 1 S. No. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CRM(M) 450/2025 CrlM (1079/2025) Abdul Gani Bhat, 82 years, House No. 8, Pamposh Lane, Natipora, Srinagar-190015. Cell: 9906631367 …Petitioner/(s) Through: Petitioner in person Vs. 1. Nishat Ara, R/O Hazratbal, Srinagar. Cell Nos: 9697213669, 7006697234. 2. Mr. Gowhar Majeed Dalal, (Retired) the then 4th Addl. Sessions Judge, (Addl. Judge Family Court), Srinagar. ...Respondent(s) Through: Respondent 1 present in person. CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE O R D E R (ORAL) 20.08.2025 1. The petitioner herein has maintained the instant petition under Section 528 BNSS, invoking the inherent power of this Court and has sought the following reliefs:- i. The marriage of the res-1 with the petitioners son on 04.10.2014, having been brought about by deceit, fraud, falsehood and misrepresentation, may be declared as null and void, ab-initio. ii. The false and fraudulent 488-application of res-1 pending in the court of 4th Add. Session Judge (add. Judge Family court, Srinagar) may be stayed and quashed. iii. Res-1, her parents, brother may be booked prosecuted and punished for the deceit, fraud, falsehood and misrepresentation. iv. Contempt of court proceedings may be initiated against res-1 for making a mockery law, court and judgement of the Hon’ble SC. v. Res-1 may be directed to return the amount of about Rs.15 lakhs, deceitfully extracted by her from the wife of the petitioner, with CI at 20% calculated at monthly rests. _____________________________________________________________________________________ CRM(M) No.450/2025 2 vi. Res-1 may be directed to return the cash, gold, goods and articles, worth 72 lakhs, looted by her from the house of the petitioner on 02.06.2017 and 13.08.2017 with interest at 20% p.a. vii. Disciplinary proceedings may be initiated against res-2 for: not observing law; making mockery law and process of law; Writing false proceedings; Directing non-applicant, on 14.06.2023, to arrange Rs. 2 lacs and 65 thousand, by begging, borrowing or stealing; Arresting the non-applicant, in the court room on 10.06.2024, and directing him to phone to his old and patient, mother in his home, for fetching Rs.5 lakhs to him; Failing to prosecute res-1 for filing, a false, fraudulent and deceitful affidavit of her properties and assets, that also not attested by a Magistrate, on 14.12.2021 (3 years and 10 months after filing her application, when much waster had flown down the river). Thereby making mockery of the Hon’ble SC judgement; and rendering the court and its prestige, into a plaything; Denying the petitioner to appear as attorney on non-applicant, whereas allowing stranger pleaders to appear for res-1, when the law is that the court could not allow pleaders to appear, for any party before him, except parties in person and their private attorneys; For humiliating the petitioner on 04.04.2023 at about 4.15 p.m., for applying for certified copies; For insulting and humiliating the petitioner on 27.09.2024, for looking at the cause list, pasted outside the court office; Treating the court and office as his private property and forbidding the petitioner from entering the court room and to the court office; For not providing certified copies to the petitioner- attorney; For not writing his name, date and th4e Name of his court, underneath the certified copies; For not writing the amounts paid by the petitioners’ wife on account of so-called interim maintenance, in the proceedings of the case, and presumably pocketing the amounts; For not writing his name, date and court name while certifying documents; For not writing the names of the pleader, stranger or otherwise, while allowing them to appear for res-1. viii. Res-1 and her two brothers, Imran Khan and Irfan Khan, may be directed to pay damages of Rs.20lakhs for breaking the car of the petitioner’s son on 09.04.2017, for the car remaining in the custody of police for more than 5 years now, where it has got fully, decayed, rusted, and scrapped. ix. Res-1, her parents and brothers may be directed to pay the costs and damages of Rs. 100 crores, for the taxation and vexation, harassment, torture, rancor, for all the 6 1/2 years, for the loss of name and fame and loss of earnings from the land, caused to the petitioner and his family. _____________________________________________________________________________________ CRM(M) No.450/2025 3 x. Tehsildar Chanpora-Natipora, Srinagar may be directed to release 31/2 Kanals of land, lying seized by him, some 5 years back. xi. The SHO Police Station, Chanpora, Srinagar. May be directed to release the car of the non-applicant seized by him some 4 years back, and the loss caused to the vehicle may be got apportioned and fixed, and the vehicle may be got repaired. xii. The res-1, her parents. Anwar Khan, Fatima Khan and brothers Imran Khan and Irfan Khan may be directed to pay costs and damages to the petitioner of Rs. 100 crores, for the vexation, taxation, torture, stress and distress caused by them to the petitioner and his family, by deceiving the petitioner and his family, by deceiving the petitioner and his family in the fraudulent marriage of res-1 with the petitioner’s son, criminally trespassing into the house on 8th April 2017, threatening to kill the petitioner in the evening of 8th April, 2017, breaking car on 9th April 2017, making false reports to police that the petitioner and his family had been demanding a car and a Bungalow from her and had been torturing her on that score. xiii. Res-1 may be directed to pay a sum of Rs. 20 crores for seeking his confidential information from his parent college on 06.04.2018 and 29.10.2018, through illegal RTI applications. xiv. Res-1 and her parents may be directed to pay 100 crores for infringement of his fundamental right to privacy marred by res-1 on 02.06.2017, 13.07.2017, and 26.02.2018 and 26.02.2018. xv. The DV Application of res-1, pending before Mobile Magistrate (PT&E). Srinagar. May be stayed and dismissed with heavy costs and penalties. xvi. The parents of res-1, Anwar Khan and Fatima, R/o 12/667, Indira Nagar, Munshi Pullia, Lucknow-226016. Mobiles Nos: 9697213669; 7006697234: 9451450728; 9450883476, may be directed to pay an amount of 100 crores for the deceit, fraud, falsehood and misrepresentation they played with the petitioner and his family in getting their barren, divorced/deserted daughter to marry the petitioner’s son on 04.10.2014, for not calling her back after her divorce on 08.04.2017, and for letting her loose in Srinagar to harass, terrorize, torture, humiliate, defame and harm the petitioner and his family.” 2. The facts emerging from the record of the petition on the strength of which the aforesaid reliefs have been sought by the petitioner herein are that in the year 2014, the respondent 1 herein got married to the Doctor son of the petitioner through a marriage portal namely, jewansathi.com on 04.10.2014 solemnized in a local Mosque in presence of the father and brothers of the respondent 1 herein and that the respondent 1 herein was in fact a divorcee was concealed at the time of _____________________________________________________________________________________ CRM(M) No.450/2025 4 marriage from the petitioner and his family and that in the said marriage an amount of Rs.50,000/- was paid to the respondent 1 as Mehar through her father including Rs. 10,000/- as gift besides ornaments, clothes and other gifts for an amount of Rs. 5.00 lacs on the next day of marriage, i.e., the day of Walima and that the parents of the respondent 1 herein even after performance of the said marriage continued to stay in the petitioners house, however, soon after the marriage, the respondent 1 herein started arguing and fighting with the petitioner’s family and that the said marriage came to be dissolved by the petitioner’s son, therefore, divorce on 08.04.2017, as the said marriage performed by respondent 1 herein with the son of the petitioner was fraud and an offence under Section 496 IPC and that the parents of the respondent 1 herein and her brothers also deceived the petitioner, his wife and his son with whom respondent 1 herein got married and that on account of the said fraud played upon the said son of petitioner herein got depressed and dejected and though he was working as an Assistant Professor, Pediatrics at SKIMS Medical College and Hospital (JVC), Srinagar, on account of his said depression, he, the said son of the petitioner started receiving letters from his employer seeking explanation and thereafter got suspended on 30th April, 2015 and that during the subsistence of the marriage of respondent 1 with his son for 2 ½ years, the respondent 1 herein stole gold and cash from the house of the petitioner herein and would take away the same to Lucknow and would stay there for 2-3 months and in the process looted around 70.00 lacs from the house of petitioner herein and deposited the same in the Bank at Lucknow, and that the respondent 1 herein kept the petitioner’s son under threat, insisting that in the event he would divorce her, she would get him eliminated by her brothers and that on 8th April, 2017, the respondent 1 herein along with her two brothers barged into the house of the petitioner herein and hurled threats upon him and his wife _____________________________________________________________________________________ CRM(M) No.450/2025 5 while saying that “what urgency you have in going up-Tumhain ooper Janay ki kaya jaldi hai,” and on the said date upon noticing the said conduct of respondent 1 and her brothers, the son of the petitioner herein pronounced Talak upon respondent 1 herein whereafter on 09th April, 2017 respondent 1 along with her brothers fled away from the house of the petitioner herein and after sometime, some policemen/women of Police Station Women’s Wing Rambagh, came to the petitioners house and took the petitioner’s son to the Police Station and upon enquiry, the petitioner came to know that a complaint has been filed against his son by the respondent 1 herein wherein it is alleged that the petitioner, his wife and son has been demanding dowry, a car and a bungalow from the respondent 1 herein besides torturing her and although a complaint had been lodged also by the petitioner herein at Police Station, Chanapora against the respondent 1 herein and her brothers for having trespassed into the house of the petitioner on 8th April, 2017 and breaking of the car by them on 09th April, 2017 and though thereafter her brothers fled away from Srinagar, however, the respondent 1 stayed in the house of the petitioner though she could not for having been divorced by the son of the petitioner and continued to complain to the Police Station, Women’s Wing Rambagh of her harassment by the petitioner and on 23rd April, 2017, the petitioner and his wife asked their son to leave the house and shift in some alternate accommodation elsewhere, in furtherance whereof though the son of the petitioner agreed to leave the house of the petitioner, the respondent 1 initially did not leave the house of the petitioner, however, at about 7.00 PM, the respondent 1 left the house of the petitioner with two large attachés and stayed in a hotel-room at Dalgate, obtained on rent by son of the petitioner and while staying in the said hotel, the respondent 1 continued to harass the petitioner and his wife through the intervention of the Women’s Police Station, Rambagh and that in the 1st week of _____________________________________________________________________________________ CRM(M) No.450/2025 6 June, 2017, the petitioner’s son obtained on rent a flat at Hazratbal and shifted there along with respondent 1 where the said son of the petitioner fell ill and got admitted in Shere-e-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Soura, Srinagar, where after the respondent 1 filed a complaint against the petitioner under Section 406 RPC in which complaint an enquiry was ordered by the Magistrate-being Forest Magistrate, Srinagar and that on 13th August, 2017, the respondent 1 barged into the house of the petitioner, along with three policemen, pursuant to some search warrant issued by the said Forest Magistrate, Srinagar and looted cash, golden ornaments and articles, amounting to Rs. 70.00 lacs from the house of the petitioner where after the said articles came to be released in favour of the respondent 1, whereupon the respondent 1 did not pursue the said complaint and same got dismissed on 29th November, 2017 and that the respondent 1 on 26th October, 2017 yet again filed a complaint with State Women’s Commission, Srinagar, against the petitioner, his wife and sons, where after on 4th December, 2017, petitioner filed CRMC No.312/2017 before this Court, challenging the complaint filed by the respondent 1 under Section 406 RPC and that on 16th December, 2017, the petitioner sent a letter to respondent 1, telling her that she stands divorced on 8th April, 2017, as such, she has no right to stay in the flat obtained on rent by his son and that on 2nd February, 2018, after ten months, respondent 1 filed a maintenance petition under Section 488 Cr.P.C, before the Mobile Magistrate (PT&E), Srinagar by suppressing true facts as the said application could not have been filed by the respondent 1 as she was a divorcee and under Muslim Personal Law not entitled to any maintenance after divorce, in which maintenance proceedings, the son of the petitioner submitted written statement consisting of 29 pages and that on 6th April, 2018, the respondent 1 even went to the College of the petitioner where he was working, being the Islamia _____________________________________________________________________________________ CRM(M) No.450/2025 7 College, Srinagar and had retired from service thereof, by filing a RTI application, seeking therein the personal and confidential information of the petitioner and filed yet another application there in the said College on 29th October, 2018, where after on 31 November, 2018, an application came to be filed by the respondent 1 before the SKIMS Medical College and Hospital, Bemina Srinagar for providing the information pertaining to the salary/account of the son of the petitioner and that in the meantime, a compliant as well came to be filed by the petitioner against the respondent 1 for having trespassed into his house and that in the maintenance proceedings filed by the respondent 1, an interim maintenance was granted to the respondent 1 despite the fact that the respondent 1 was a divorcee and not only that, the respondent 1 also filed a Domestic Violence case before the Mobile Magistrate (PT&E) Srinagar, against the petitioner, his wife and his sons including his daughter-in-law who is putting up outside Jammu and Kashmir for the last 18 years which Domestic Violence proceedings as well could not have been filed by the respondent 1 being a divorcee Muslim wife and that the petitioner maintained CRMC No. 489/2018 against the said maintenance proceedings filed by the respondent 1 and impleaded not only the respondent 1 therein, in the said petition but also the Mobile Magistrate (PT&E) Srinagar as respondent, in which petition, this Court on 10th May, 2019, stayed the proceedings in the said Domestic Violence case and that a complaint as well came to be filed by the petitioner against Mr. O. P. Thakur, the then Presiding Officer of Judge Small Causes court (JSC), Srinagar before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar in which complaint a report was sought by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar from the said JSC Court and that during the course of the proceedings before the JSC, Srinagar, on 26th April, 2019, the petitioner was kept in judicial lock-up, till 4.15 P.M., and that the said case pending before the said court was however, withdrawn by the Chief _____________________________________________________________________________________ CRM(M) No.450/2025 8 Judicial Magistrate and assigned to Mobile Magistrate (13th Finance Commission) Srinagar and that the petitioner in the meantime, also filed CRMC No. 181/2019 before this Court, followed by a contempt petition No.841/2019, besides filing an application under Section 430 IPC against the respondent 1 for having sworn a false affidavit before the Principal District Judge, Srinagar which came to be assigned to 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Srinagar and that on 15th June, 2019, a charge sheet was filed by the Police Station Sadder against the petitioner’s son before the 1st Additional Munsiff (Judicial Magistrate 1st class), Srinagar and that on 29th October, 2019, an order was passed in CRMC No. 181/2019, seeking status of the case pertaining to the maintenance proceedings filed by respondent 1 under Section 488 Cr.P.C., and despite the High Court being seized of the matter, the said Mobile Magistrate (13th Finance Commission), Srinagar issued warrants of arrest against the son of the petitioner for non-payment of the interim maintenance followed by a direction upon the Tehsildar Chanapora for attaching 3 ½ Kanals of land of the petitioner for non-payment of said maintenance by the son of the petitioner to the respondent 1 and thereafter passed order dated 14th March, 2020 whereby the Tehsildar concerned was directed to auction 5 marlas out of the said land, whereafter another warrant of arrest came to be issued by the said Magistrate and seizure of the car of the petitioner’s son has also been ordered being his moveable property which car upon being seized continues to remain in the custody of Police Post Chanpora and that in the meantime, on 24th April, 2021, the maintenance case filed by the respondent 1 came to be transferred to the Family Court, Srinagar wherein the proceedings came to be conducted by the Presiding Officer of the said court and that on 1st June, 2021, without issuing a notice in those proceedings, the said court issued non-bailable warrants against the son of the petitioner and also made derogatory remarks in order dated 1st June, _____________________________________________________________________________________ CRM(M) No.450/2025 9 2020 against the petitioner while observing that the petitioner being the father of the non-applicant is playing delay tactics in the case, as the petitioner herein is the attorney of his son and has been appearing in the Family court on his behalf and on account of the unwarranted conduct of the Presiding Officer of the Family court, a complaint was filed by the petitioner before the Principal District Judge, Srinagar in this behalf and instead of taking a action thereupon on the said complaint, an FIR came to be lodged against the petitioner by the said Presiding Officer on 17th June, 2021, alleging therein that the petitioner abused her and her women staff in the court and that on 3rd July, 2021 under the instructions of the said Presiding Officer, the petitioner came to be arrested by SHO Police Station, Batamaloo and an FIR bearing No. 102/2021 was registered against the petitioner and thereafter a charge sheet was filed and that in the maintenance proceedings, the Family court on 13.10.2021 directed the son of the petitioner to pay Rs.2.00 lacs to respondent 1 otherwise he would be sent to jail and that in the meantime, this Court dismissed the aforesaid CRM (C) filed by the petitioner and even the contempt proceedings came to be dismissed on 25th May, 2022, while imposing Rs. 25,000/- costs upon the petitioner, aggrieved whereof a Letter Patent Appeal (LPA) being No. 137/2023 was filed and the same is pending disposal and that on 12th September, 2021, the respondent 1 herein presented the said judgment of this Court whereby Rs. 25,000/- costs were imposed upon the petitioner before the court below and the said amount of costs were paid by way of a cheque by the son of the petitioner before the Family court and that not only the Family court but also the court wherein Domestic Violence case is pending are improperly conducting the proceedings which dejected the son of the petitioner and even made him to lose faith in the Judges and that the petitioner also informed the court below that a writ of quo warranto has been sought before the High Court in a writ petition _____________________________________________________________________________________ CRM(M) No.450/2025 10 which petition however, came to be dismissed in limine with costs and that on 10th June, 2024, the court below in the maintenance case got the son of the petitioner arrested in the proceedings pending before the said court while directing him to deposit Rs. 5.00 lacs as maintenance, payable to the respondent 1 herein, where after Rs. 3.00 lacs were managed by the son of the petitioner and a cheque to the tune of said amount was presented before the said court and that the respondent 1 herein has been illegally and unlawfully extracting money from the petitioner and his wife pursuant to the cases filed by her before the courts below. 3. Upon coming the instant petition for consideration on 4th August, 2025, and having regard to the case setup by the petitioner herein in the instant petition, it was deemed appropriate to summon the scanned record of both the cases filed by the respondent 1 before the court below referred in the petition which record has been received. Heard the petitioner as also the respondent 1 who chose to appear of her own, despite no notice have had been issued in the petition by this Court. 4. Before adverting to the case setup in the instant petition by the petitioner, it would be appropriate to refer hereunder to the provisions of Section 528 BNSS (previously Section 482 Cr.P.C.), and the principles of law laid down in regard to its exercise in that the said provision has been invoked by the petitioner for maintaining the instant petition. Section 528 BNSS:- “Nothing in this Sanhita shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Sanhita, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice”. The Apex Court in case titled Dhruram Murlidhar Sonar v. State of Maharashtra (2019) 18 SCC 191 has held at paragraphs 8, 11 and 12 as under:- _____________________________________________________________________________________ CRM(M) No.450/2025 11 “8. It is well settled that exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is the exception and not the rule. Under this section, the High Court has inherent powers to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under the Code or to prevent the abuse of process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. But the expressions "abuse of process of law" or "to secure the ends of justice" 11. In State of Karnataka v. M. Devendrappa and Anr., (2002) 3 SCC 89, it was held that while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the court does not function as a court of appeal or revision. Inherent jurisdiction under the Section though wide has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution and only when such exercise is justified by the tests specifically laid down in the Section itself. It was further held as under:- "It would be an abuse of process of the court to allow any action which would result in injustice and prevent promotion of justice. In exercise of the powers court would be justified to quash any proceeding if it finds that initiation/continuance of it amounts to abuse of the process of court or quashing of these proceedings would otherwise serve the ends of justice. When no offence is disclosed by the complaint, the court may examine the question of fact. When a complaint is sought to be quashed, it is permissible to look into the materials to assess what the complainant has alleged and whether any offence is made out even if the allegations are accepted in toto" 12. Recently, in Vineet Kumar and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. (2017) 13 SCC 369, this Court has observed as under: "Inherent power given to the High Court under Section 482 CrPC is with the purpose and object of advancement of justice. In case solemn process of Court is sought to be abused by a person with some oblique motive, the Court has to thwart the attempt at the very threshold. Judicial process is a solemn proceeding which cannot be allowed to be converted into an instrument of oppression or harassment. When there are materials to indicate that a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive, the High Court will not hesitate in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceeding. The present is a fit case where the High Court ought to have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC and quashed the criminal proceedings”. It needs to be noted here that the inherent power under Section 528 BNSS has been vested in this Court with the purpose and object of advancement of justice yet the said power cannot be said to be conferring an unlimited and unguided power and cannot be exercised upon mere asking by a party. 5. Perusal of the case setup by the petitioner in the instant petition on a careful examination thereof does not anywhere suggest that the petitioner has alleged that any order passed under BNSS has necessarily to be given effect to or that there has been an abuse of the process of the court at the hands of respondent 1 herein or that the exercise of power for securing the ends of justice is necessary. _____________________________________________________________________________________ CRM(M) No.450/2025 12 The petitioner seemingly is aggrieved rather offended by the cases instituted by the respondent 1 herein arising out of her matrimonial life with the son of the petitioner in particular and the family of the said son of the petitioner including the petitioner herein, and also seemingly is unhappy with the conduct of proceedings therein the said cases and orders passed therein. The petitioner instead of taking recourse to appropriate remedies against said proceedings and orders passed therein has chosen to maintain the instant petition ex-facie as tool to pressurize the respondent 1 as also the Judicial Officers/Magistrates who have had either dealt with the said cases or who are now dealing with the same. Thus, it can safely be said that the instant petition is not less than a deliberate and intentional attempt of the petitioner to abuse the process of law and defeat the ends of justice. Besides, the reliefs sought in the petition are also incapable of being granted in exercise of inherent power of this Court. It has also been noticed from the record made available by the Registry that the petitioner has already instituted a suit for damages as attorney of his son against the respondent 1 herein having claimed Rs.20.00 crores from the respondent 1 herein almost on same set of facts and allegations on which the petitioner herein has maintained the instant petition. The said suit is pending before the Court of 1st Additional District Judge, Srinagar, and the next date has been fixed therein on 22.08.2025. 6. Accordingly, the instant petition is found grossly misconceived and is dismissed along with CrlM(s). (JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE SRINAGAR 20.08.2025 “Ab. Rashid” Whether the order is speaking: Yes Whether the order is reportable: Yes Abdul Rashid Ganaie I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document :29.08.2025 10:08