Domestic Violence: Allahabad High Court Says Husband Can Be Prosecuted Even After Divorce
Allahabad High Court holds that a decree of divorce does not bar proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, if the alleged abuse occurred during a subsisting domestic relationship.
Allahabad High Court says divorce doesn't end domestic violence liability.
Holding that a decree of divorce does not wipe out a husband's liability for acts of domestic violence allegedly committed during the marriage, the Allahabad High Court has refused to quash proceedings initiated by a woman under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, observing that the law continues to protect women against violence suffered during a subsisting domestic relationship.
Justice Brij Raj Singh said that "an act of domestic violence once committed, subsequent decree of divorce will not absolve the liability of the husband from the offence committed or to deny the benefit to which the aggrieved person is entitled under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005".
Court dismissed a petition filed by Puneet Rastogi under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [replaced by Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)] seeking quashing of a complaint instituted by his former wife under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act.
Domestic Violence Act protection survives divorce decree
Rejecting the husband's contention that the domestic violence proceedings became non-maintainable after the marriage was dissolved, court held that the statutory definition of "domestic relationship" is broad enough to include persons who had lived together in a shared household at any point of time.
Also Read|Domestic Violence Act applicable to all women irrespective of religion, social background: SC
"The wife is eligible to claim protection under the Domestic Violence Act because the definition of domestic relationship... 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 of time, lived together in a shared household," court observed.
Court further noted that remedies available under the Act, including monetary relief, child custody, compensation and interim orders, cannot be denied merely because a decree of divorce has subsequently been passed.
Why the husband sought quashing of the case
The petitioner submitted that the parties married on April 18, 2017, and that he had obtained a divorce decree on March 1, 2025 on the ground of cruelty by the wife. The family court had also dismissed the wife's petitions seeking restitution of conjugal rights and return of stridhan.
Relying on these findings, the husband argued that the allegations raised in the domestic violence complaint were identical to those already adjudicated by the family court and amounted to an abuse of process. He also contended that once the marriage stood dissolved, there was no subsisting domestic relationship to sustain proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act.
The wife opposed the plea, alleging that she had been subjected to physical and mental cruelty, dowry-related harassment and that her jewellery continued to remain with the husband and his family. She also contended that the appeal against the divorce decree was pending.
While considering the plea, the high court referred to a series of Supreme Court judgments, including Prabha Tyagi vs. Kamlesh Devi (2022), Juveria Abdul Majid Patni vs. Atif Iqbal Mansoori (2014), Inderjit Singh Grewal vs. State of Punjab and another (2011) and Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi vs. Vidhi Rawal (2025).
Drawing from these decisions, court reiterated that even after a divorce, a woman can invoke the Domestic Violence Act if the allegations relate to acts committed during the period when the parties shared a domestic relationship.
Court also noted that although high courts possess powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act, such jurisdiction must be exercised sparingly and only in cases involving gross illegality or manifest injustice.
No 'mini trial' at Section 482 stage
Declining to interfere with the pending proceedings, the high court observed that the allegations of domestic violence and the rival claims of the parties require appreciation of evidence before the trial court.
Also Watch| Video Opinion| Law & Pop Culture| Darlings: Should Laws against Domestic Violence be Gender-Neutral?
"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 suit for divorce has been decreed in favour of the applicant," Court said.
Finding no merit in the petition, the high court dismissed the husband's application, allowing the domestic violence proceedings before the trial court to continue.
Case Title: Puneet Rastogi v. State of Uttar Pradesh through Principal Secretary, Home, Lucknow & Another
Judgment Date: July 7, 2026
Bench: Justice Brij Raj Singh