Domestic violence law also for couples who shared a home once: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that the Domestic Violence Act not only includes couples living together in the same setting but also those who once shared a household in the past. The court, therefore, refused to quash a domestic violence case filed by a woman against her estranged husband despite their divorce.

Justice Brij Raj Singh ruled in favor of the wife who had alleged domestic violence against her husband and held that a divorce decree does not erase alleged past cruelty. A woman can seek relief under the Domestic Violence Act for abuse suffered during the marriage, the court added.

“The wife is eligible to claim protection under the Domestic Violence Act because the definition of domestic relationship as provided under Section 2(s) of the Domestic Violence Act includes not only a relationship between two persons who presently live together in a shared household, but also extends to persons who have, at any point in time lived together in a shared household,” the court said on July 7.

The court noted that the judicial separation ordered by a court of law does not put an end to marriage and, hence, the domestic relationship continues between the wife and husband even though they may not be actually living together.

Husband alleged wife’s cruelty

The couple married on April 18, 2017, in Lucknow. After the rituals, they went to Ghaziabad to start their matrimonial life. The husband claimed that on November 9, 2017, after the death of his father, his wife and her brother were trying to bring up inheritance issues and created a scene over the dead body.

Justice Brij Raj Singh said that the wife is eligible to claim protection under the Domestic Violence Act.

He alleged that his wife was “cruel, disrespectful, and highly uncooperative” during his father’s illness and even after his death. A further allegation of the husband was that after his father’s death, he had to travel to Germany for his official trip, and during this time, even after repeated requests to be with his widowed mother, his wife lived in her brother’s house.

At the start of 2019, the husband claimed that he tried to bring back his wife, but she denied. Then the husband approached the legal services authority for mediation to save the marriage, but claimed that the wife did not cooperate in the mediation process, and it failed.

Story continues below this ad

Wife filed domestic violence case, husband sought divorce

Amidst this, the wife, in February 2019, filed a complaint under section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, alleging mental and physical cruelty, demand for dowry, had an extra-marital affair with a co-worker, and retained her jewellery (stridhan).

The wife contended that the applicant is working in a multinational company and has a salary of around Rs 40 lacs annually, which can also be verified from his salary slip, but due to his greedy nature, he never agreed to accept without dowry and was involved in an extramarital affair with a female co-worker, which led to spoiling their married life.

In April, 2019, the husband filed for divorce on grounds of cruelty, which the family court allowed in 2025. However, her domestic violence complaint concerned acts committed during the marriage, so it remained maintainable despite the divorce. The husband is now challenging the proceedings in the domestic violence case before the high court, arguing that the domestic violence case was based on the same allegations and should be dismissed.

Divorce doesn’t end liability: Court

There is a provision of monetary relief under Section 20, child custody under Section 21, compensation under Section 22, and an interim or ex parte order under Section 23 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

All these issues can be decided after adducing the evidence on record, but at this stage, this Court cannot do mini trial and quash the entire proceedings on the ground that the suit for divorce has been decreed in favour of the applicant.

An act of domestic violence once committed, a subsequent decree of divorce will not absolve the liability of the husband from the offence committed or deny the benefit to which the aggrieved person is entitled under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

The court dismissed the husband’s plea seeking to quash the domestic violence proceedings against him. It held that a divorce does not take away a woman’s right to seek relief for alleged domestic violence committed during the marriage. The trial court must decide the claims after evidence is recorded, not through a preliminary quashing petition, the order reads.