Advocate Inayat Malik

24/08/2026

24/08/2026

“Residence Is an Urgent Relief”: J&K High Court Says DV Victims Need Not Wait for Trial to End

Srinagar: The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has observed that residence is an urgent relief under the Domestic Violence Act and an aggrieved woman need not wait for the conclusion of the trial to obtain an interim residence order.

Justice Sanjay Dhar made the observation while dealing with a petition filed by a woman, who had challenged the setting aside of a trial court order directing her husband to provide her safe and secure accommodation in the shared household.

The High Court held that Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act empowers a Magistrate to grant interim relief, including an interim residence order, during the pendency of proceedings under Section 12.

The Court clarified that although a final residence order under Section 19 may be passed while finally disposing of the application under Section 12, an interim residence order can be granted at an earlier stage.

For granting such interim relief, the Magistrate is not required to conduct a full-fledged trial. The Court said the Magistrate only needs to draw satisfaction from the material placed before him that the application prima facie discloses an act of domestic violence, or a likelihood of such violence.

Justice Dhar underscored the protective purpose of the legislation, observing that a residence order is an “urgent relief” intended to protect a woman from being left without shelter.

The High Court further held that the contrary view taken by the Principal Sessions Judge, Kupwara— that residence relief could be granted only after conclusion of the trial— was inconsistent with Section 23 of the DV Act and its legislative object of providing immediate relief from domestic violence.

The Court accordingly set aside the Sessions Court order and restored the legal position that interim residential protection can be granted even before the main DV proceedings are finally decided.

23/08/2026

With profound grief and sorrow I have heard news about demise of beloved nephew of Adv. Tasaduq (Aamir) Salwati Sb of Zachaldara.
I extend my heartfelt condolences to Adv. Tasaduq (Aamir) Salwati and the bereaved family during this difficult time. May Almighty grant the departed soul eternal peace and highest place in Jannah, and bestow strength, patience, and fortitude upon family to bear this irreparable loss.

22/08/2026

Speaking in Girls Higher Secondary Beerwah on Fundamental Rights and Duties in a program organised by Tehsil Legal Services Committee Beerwah.

22/08/2026

Deeply saddened to hear about the loss of a precious asset. Death of Ghulam Ahmad Lone from Hanjiguroo Beerwah is an irreparable loss. He was a teacher, a great research scholar and a gentle human being. May God rest his soul in peace.

22/08/2026

Court Issues Pre-Cognizance Notice to Tehsildar Over Alleged Acts Against Practising Lawyer

Sopore: The Court of District Mobile Magistrate (Traffic), Sopore, has issued a pre-cognizance notice under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to Tehsildar Sopore Tariq Ahmad Sheikh on a complaint filed by the Bar Association Sopore through its President and another.

The complaint relates to acts allegedly committed during an official interaction while the Tehsildar was functioning in his official capacity, involving a practising lawyer. The complaint alleges commission of offences under Sections 126, 131, 351 and 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

The Court, presided over by Usman Khursid, District Mobile Magistrate (Traffic), Sopore, noted that before considering the question of taking cognizance, the Tehsildar was required to be afforded an opportunity of being heard in terms of the proviso to Section 223(1) BNSS.

The Court has accordingly directed Tariq Ahmad Sheikh to appear before it on August 31, 2026, either personally or through counsel, and avail the opportunity of hearing at the pre-cognizance stage.

The Court further observed that, in terms of Section 223(2) BNSS, the Tehsildar would be at liberty to place before the Court his assertions regarding the circumstances which allegedly led to the incident.

Importantly, the Court clarified that no cognizance has yet been taken against the Tehsildar and that issuance of the pre-cognizance notice shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the allegations contained in the complaint.

The notice was issued under the hand and seal of the Court on August 20, 2026.