The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has ruled that an order merely issuing notice during court proceedings is an interlocutory one and cannot be challenged through revisional jurisdiction under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

The matter stemmed from a petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.

After directions were passed by the Magistrate on February 11, 2025, the petitioners moved an execution application, along with an additional plea seeking to restrain the respondents from alienating their property. In response, the Magistrate issued notice on the latter application.

Challenging this act of issuance of notice, the petitioners filed a revision petition, which was dismissed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge on the ground of non-maintainability. The petitioners then approached the High Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, challenging the Sessions Court’s order.

Justice Sanjay Dhar, while dismissing the plea, held that issuance of notice does not decide the rights of the parties and is purely interlocutory in nature. “An interlocutory order is one that facilitates the progress of proceedings and does not conclusively resolve any substantive right,” the Court observed.

The Court also referred to Section 438(2) of the BNSS, which bars the exercise of revisional powers against interlocutory orders.

Holding that the Sessions Court had rightly declined to entertain the revision petition, the High Court dismissed the matter, reiterating that no substantive rights were affected by the impugned order.

Case Title: Aamina & Ors. v. Aamir Ahmed Mir & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar