HIGH COURT OF JAMMU, KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR (TH. VIRTUAL MODE) CRM(M) No. 368/2025 Mst. Ateeqa and others …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Mir Manzoor Ahmed, Adv. q vs Sabiya Jan and anr. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Mohd. Tufail, Adv. Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER 20.05.2026 1. The petitioners have challenged order dated 19.05.2025 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shopian, whereby in a proceedings under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (hereinafter to be referred as the DV Act), a direction has been issued to the petitioner No. 6 to pay a sum of ₹1500/- as rental per month to the respondents. It has been further directed that petitioner No. 6 shall pay maintenance of ₹3500/- per month to respondent No. 1 and ₹2000/- per month to respondent No. 2. The petitioners have also challenged the proceedings initiated by the respondents against them on the basis of the petition filed under section 12 of the DV Act, which is pending before the Trial Magistrate. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. So far as impugned order dated 19.02.2025 is concerned, the same has been passed by the Trial Magistrate in exercise of his powers under 12 CRM(M) No. 368/2025 Page 2 of 2 section 23 of the DV Act, as such, the order is appealable in terms of section 29 of the DV Act. Thus, the petitioners have an alternative and efficacious remedy for filing appeal against the said order. 4. Regarding the prayer of the petitioners for dropping of proceedings, it is to be noted that the proceedings under section 12 of the DV Act are not criminal in nature. It is open to the Trial Magistrate to drop the proceedings against the husband and his relatives, if upon consideration of the reply filed by them and upon consideration of the other material on record, the Magistrate comes to the conclusion that the husband or the relatives have been unnecessarily proceeded against. Thus, the petitioners have an option of filing an application for dropping of the proceedings before the Trial Magistrate. In case, they succeed in showing to the Trial Magistrate that they have been unnecessarily roped in, it shall be open to the trial Magistrate to drop the proceedings against the petitioners. 5. In view of the above, the present petition is held to be not maintainable and is dismissed as such, leaving it open to the petitioners to avail appropriate remedy as indicated hereinbefore. (SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE Jammu 20.05.2026 Rakesh PS Rakesh Kumar 2026.05.21 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Jammu