Most litigants meet the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 through an application under Section 12 before a Magistrate. But the Act contains a quieter, strategically important provision: Section 26, under which the reliefs available under Sections 18 to 22 — protection orders, residence orders, monetary relief, custody orders and compensation — may also be sought in any legal proceeding before a civil court, family court or criminal court that affects the aggrieved woman and the respondent. A wife defending a divorce petition, prosecuting a maintenance case, or contesting a guardianship petition can raise DV Act reliefs there, without instituting a separate DV case. This explainer sets out how Section 26 works, when it is worth using, and the disclosure discipline it imposes.
What Section 26 says
Section 26 has three limbs. First, any relief available under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 may also be sought in any legal proceeding, before a civil court, family court or a criminal court, affecting the aggrieved person and the respondent — whether that proceeding was initiated before or after the commencement of the DV Act. Second, any such relief may be sought in addition to and along with any other relief that the aggrieved person may seek in that suit or proceeding. Third, in case any relief has been obtained by the aggrieved person in any proceedings other than a proceeding under the DV Act, she shall be bound to inform the Magistrate of the grant of such relief.
Section 18
Protection orders against acts of domestic violence, aiding or abetting, and specified contacts.
Section 19
Residence orders securing the right to reside in the shared household or alternate accommodation.
Section 20
Monetary relief — maintenance, loss of earnings, medical expenses, loss caused by destruction or removal of property.
Sections 21–22
Temporary custody of children and compensation for injuries, including mental torture and emotional distress.
Why the provision matters in practice
Matrimonial litigation in Delhi is rarely a single case. A contested divorce before the Family Court, a maintenance petition under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, a guardianship petition, and sometimes a criminal complaint may all be running at once. Without Section 26, every DV Act relief would require yet another case before a Magistrate — another court, another set of dates, another round of pleadings. Section 26 permits consolidation of substance: the woman already before the Family Court in a divorce can, by application in that very case, seek a residence order protecting her occupation of the shared household or monetary relief under Section 20, and the Family Court decides it with the full matrimonial record before it.
The provision also works defensively. A respondent facing multiple proceedings is entitled to point out overlapping claims: maintenance under Section 20 of the DV Act, Section 144 BNSS and Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 compensate the same need, and courts adjust one against the other rather than permitting cumulative recovery. Section 26(3) is the statutory anchor of that adjustment — the duty to disclose relief obtained elsewhere lies on the aggrieved person, and suppression invites both recall of orders and an adverse view of credibility.
Choosing the forum
Where both routes are open, the choice between a fresh Section 12 application and a Section 26 application in a pending case is a genuine forensic decision. The table sets out the usual considerations.
| Factor | Section 12 before the Magistrate | Section 26 in a pending case |
|---|---|---|
| Speed of interim orders | Purpose-built machinery; interim and ex parte orders under Section 23; Domestic Incident Report available | Depends on the pace and stage of the host proceeding |
| Breach consequences | Breach of a protection order is an offence under Section 31 | Substantive relief available; penal machinery of the DV court remains separate |
| Convenience | A separate case to run | No new case; decided on the existing record before a court already familiar with the family |
| Risk of inconsistency | Parallel orders possible; disclosure duty applies | Single court balances all reliefs together |
The disclosure discipline
Section 26(3) is drafted as an obligation, not a courtesy. Every application under the DV Act — and every affidavit of income filed in maintenance proceedings — should set out the parallel proceedings between the parties, the reliefs claimed, and the orders passed. In Delhi practice, maintenance adjudication proceeds on sworn affidavits of assets and liabilities in which pending litigation must be listed; an order obtained in one forum and concealed from another is quickly exposed and heavily held against the party concealing it. The safe course is symmetrical candour: disclose everything, everywhere, and ask the court to adjust.
Section 26 confers choice of forum for the reliefs of Sections 18 to 22; it does not multiply entitlement. One need, one compensation — whichever statute supplies the label. Parties and counsel should treat overlapping maintenance and residence claims as a single account to be settled across forums, not as separate winnings.
The chamber of Advocate Manish Jha advises and appears in domestic violence, maintenance and matrimonial proceedings before the District Courts of Delhi, the Family Courts and the High Court of Delhi. This article is for general information; it is not legal advice and does not create an advocate-client relationship.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can DV Act reliefs really be claimed in a divorce case?
Yes. Section 26(1) permits any relief available under Sections 18 to 22 of the DV Act to be sought in any legal proceeding before a civil court, family court or criminal court affecting the aggrieved person and the respondent — a divorce petition, a maintenance case, a guardianship petition or a criminal proceeding. The relief is claimed by an application in that pending case.
Does using Section 26 bar a separate DV application?
No. Section 26(2) says the relief may be sought in addition to and along with any other relief the woman claims in that suit or proceeding. But Section 26(3) requires her to inform the Magistrate of any relief already obtained in the other proceeding, so that orders are adjusted and double recovery of the same relief is avoided.
Which reliefs travel under Section 26?
The substantive reliefs of Sections 18 to 22: protection orders, residence orders, monetary relief including maintenance and expenses, temporary custody orders, and compensation for injuries including mental torture and emotional distress. Procedural machinery peculiar to the Magistrate — such as breach prosecution under Section 31 — remains anchored in the DV court.
Is a Family Court bound to entertain a Section 26 application?
A Family Court seized of a matrimonial case is a forum contemplated by Section 26, and it must consider the application on its merits. It retains discretion over interim procedure, and it will examine whether the same relief is already pending or granted elsewhere — which is why candid disclosure across forums is essential.