Srinagar: A court here on Thursday granted interim relief to Sandeep Mawa in a civil defamation suit seeking ₹1,100 crore in damages from Ghulam Rassol Hami and others, and temporarily restrained them from circulating allegedly defamatory content against him.
The Court of Additional District Judge Srinagar, presided over by Farooq Ahmad Bhat, issued notices to the respondents while hearing the plea and held that immediate intervention was necessary to prevent further harm to the plaintiff’s reputation until the dispute is fully heard.
Mawa has accused multiple defendants, primarily including Hami, chairman of Karwai Islami, of conspiring to circulate defamatory and derogatory statements, videos and images targeting his personal life, family and religious identity. He alleged that the material was widely disseminated across social media platforms without his consent, causing serious reputational and social damage.
Terming the content “baseless and derogatory”, Mawa said it continued to spread despite repeated requests for its removal. He further alleged that the controversy was amplified by various individuals and digital platforms, harming his public image and standing in society.
According to the plaint, the alleged campaign began after he publicly opposed what he described as Hami’s “misleading religious practices”. The suit claims the defendants launched a sustained online campaign targeting not only him but also his wife and religious beliefs, resulting in public embarrassment, emotional distress and long-term damage to his reputation.
Mawa has sought damages of ₹1,100 crore, arguing that the scale of reputational harm is enormous and cannot be adequately compensated by a smaller amount. The suit maintains the alleged defamation has led to loss of public trust, social stigma and irreversible damage to his personal and professional standing.
After hearing the petitioner’s counsel and reviewing the record, the court observed that a prima facie case exists in favour of the plaintiff at this preliminary stage. It held that the balance of convenience tilts in favour of the petitioner and failure to grant interim relief could result in irreparable injury.
The court issued a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from circulating or publishing any defamatory or derogatory statements about the plaintiff until the next hearing. The judge also dispensed with prior notice to the defendants, citing urgency and the need to prevent further alleged harm.
However, the respondents have been granted liberty to approach the court to seek modification or cancellation of the interim order before the next hearing date. Notices have been issued directing them to file objections.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on February 20, 2026.
