Introduction
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDV Act) was enacted as a gender-specific legislation aimed at protecting women from various forms of domestic abuse within familial and household settings. A recurrent legal debate was whether a divorced wife could invoke the provisions of the PWDV Act for past incidents of domestic violence and claim relief such as maintenance, residence order, or protection order even after divorce.
In this context, the Supreme Court’s decision in Krishna Bhattacharjee vs Sarathi Choudhury is a milestone ruling, as it interpreted the scope of Section 2(a) and 2(f) of the PWDV Act concerning a divorced woman’s eligibility for relief under this law.
Background of the Case
Facts of the Case
- Krishna Bhattacharjee, the appellant-wife, was married to Sarathi Choudhury. During the marriage, she alleged she was subjected to domestic violence.
- In 2006, she filed a complaint under the Domestic Violence Act claiming maintenance and other reliefs.
- Meanwhile, divorce was granted to the husband in an ex parte proceeding.
- The trial court dismissed her application on the ground that as the marriage had already ended, she ceased to be an “aggrieved person” under the Act.
- The Gauhati High Court upheld this dismissal.
- Aggrieved, the wife approached the Supreme Court.
Legal Issues Before the Supreme Court
- Whether a divorced wife can be considered an “aggrieved person” under the PWDV Act, 2005?
- Whether incidents of domestic violence that occurred before divorce can still be subject to a claim under the Act after divorce?
Supreme Court’s Observations
The Hon’ble Supreme Court delivered a detailed and progressive interpretation of the PWDV Act.
1. Definition of ‘Aggrieved Person’ (Section 2(a))
The Court observed that the Act defines ‘aggrieved person’ to mean any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to domestic violence.
It emphasised that the phrase ‘has been’ indicates that even a woman who was previously in a domestic relationship (i.e. now divorced) can invoke provisions of the Act if she was subjected to domestic violence during the subsistence of the marriage.
2. Scope of ‘Domestic Relationship’ (Section 2(f))
The Court held that a ‘domestic relationship’ under the Act refers to a relationship between two persons who live, or have at any point of time lived, together in a shared household when they were related by marriage.
Thus, a past relationship of marriage and cohabitation qualifies a divorced wife to claim as an aggrieved person for the violence faced while in that relationship.
3. Relief for Past Domestic Violence
The Court clarified that the PWDV Act provides relief not only for ongoing domestic violence but also for violence that ‘has been committed in the past’ during the subsistence of a domestic relationship.
Hence, a divorced woman is entitled to seek relief for the abuse and deprivation she suffered during the marriage even after the dissolution of marriage.
4. Maintenance Claim Under Section 20
The Supreme Court further held that a divorced wife can claim monetary relief (maintenance) under Section 20 of the PWDV Act, in addition to or apart from her rights under Section 125 CrPC.
The Court stressed that maintenance is a continuing right for sustenance, dignity, and livelihood of an aggrieved woman — and the grant of maintenance under the PWDV Act has a distinct statutory purpose from Section 125 CrPC.
Key Legal Principles Laid Down
- A divorced wife is an ‘aggrieved person’ under Section 2(a) of the PWDV Act if she was subjected to domestic violence during the marriage.
- Past incidents of domestic violence can be grounds for relief under the PWDV Act, even after divorce.
- A divorced wife can claim monetary relief, residence orders, and other reliefs under the Act.
- Maintenance under the PWDV Act is independent and supplementary to rights under Section 125 CrPC or other civil remedies.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Krishna Bhattacharjee vs Sarathi Choudhury is a landmark decision that strengthened the protective ambit of the PWDV Act, 2005. It ensured that a divorced woman is not left remediless for the domestic violence she endured during her marriage and that she retains the right to claim maintenance and other protections even after divorce.
This progressive interpretation has served as a guiding precedent for courts handling domestic violence cases involving divorced women, reaffirming the law’s humane and welfare-oriented spirit.
Citation:
For a detailed understanding, you can refer to the full judgment here: Krishna Bhattacharjee vs Sarathi Choudhury (2015)
Important: Kindly Refer New Corresponding Sections of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, (BNS); Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, (BNSS); & Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023, (BSA) for IPC; CrPC & IEA used in the article.
Disclaimer: This information is intended for general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult with a qualified lawyer for personalized advice specific to your situation.
Advocate J.S. Rohilla (Civil & Criminal Lawyer in Indore)
Contact: 88271 22304