Relief in Other Proceedings and Alteration of Orders: Sections 25 and 26 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005

Two provisions give the Act its suppleness over time and across forums. Section 25 governs the life of orders: a protection order runs until the woman herself seeks its discharge, and any order may be altered, modified or revoked on a change in circumstances, by reasoned order. Section 26 governs the geography of relief: everything Sections 18 to 22 offer may also be claimed in any pending civil, family or criminal proceeding, the divorce, the maintenance case, the criminal trial, with a duty to disclose relief obtained elsewhere so that no one recovers twice. This note explains both sections and the working rules that keep concurrent jurisdictions in harmony.

1. Duration and Alteration of Orders: Section 25

Section 25, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Duration and alteration of orders

(1) A protection order made under section 18 shall be in force till the aggrieved person applies for discharge.

(2) If the Magistrate, on receipt of an application from the aggrieved person or the respondent, is satisfied that there is a change in the circumstances requiring alteration, modification or revocation of any order made under this Act, he may, for reasons to be recorded in writing pass such order, as he may deem appropriate.

1.1 Duration: until she seeks discharge

Sub-section (1) inverts the usual life of an injunction. A protection order has no expiry date: it continues until the aggrieved person applies for discharge, because the danger it answers has no calendar. The respondent cannot outwait it; his route is sub-section (2), and only on changed circumstances. Other orders take their duration from their nature: residence orders protect while the need endures, monetary orders run as framed (monthly or lump sum), interim orders until replaced.

1.2 Alteration on changed circumstances

Sub-section (2) is the Act's continuing jurisdiction. Either party may apply; the trigger is a change in the circumstances, and the order must record reasons in writing. Changes include reconciliation or remarriage, altered incomes and employment, relocation, the children's evolving needs, fresh violence (justifying stricter orders), or supervening court decisions such as a decree in the civil suit over the household.

📖 S. Vijikumari v. Mowneshwarachari C. (Supreme Court, September 2024)

Held: Section 25(2) can be invoked only on a change in circumstances arising after the order under Section 12 was passed; it is not a disguised appeal or review of the original order on the old facts. An alteration or revocation operates prospectively, from the date of the changed circumstances found, it cannot reopen or claw back maintenance already paid under the original order. The Court reiterated that the Act is a piece of civil code applicable to every woman in India irrespective of religious affiliation or social background.

✦ Mnemonic: 'No expiry, only revision, and only forward'

A protection order has no expiry (until she seeks discharge); every order allows revision on changed circumstances, by reasons in writing; and revision runs only forward (prospectively, per Vijikumari). Coaching analogy: a DV order is a thermostat, not a timer: it does not switch off with time, but resets when the temperature of the facts genuinely changes.

2. Relief in Other Proceedings: Section 26

Section 26, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Relief in other suits and legal proceedings

(1) 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 such proceeding was initiated before or after the commencement of this Act.

(2) Any relief referred to in sub-section (1) may be sought for in addition to and along with any other relief that the aggrieved person may seek in such suit or legal proceeding before a civil or criminal court.

(3) In case any relief has been obtained by the aggrieved person in any proceedings other than a proceeding under this Act, she shall be bound to inform the Magistrate of the grant of such relief.

2.1 One set of reliefs, many doors

Section 26 detaches the Act's reliefs from the Magistrate's court and makes them portable. A woman already before the Family Court in a divorce, before a civil court in the in-laws' possession suit, or before a criminal court in the cruelty trial need not open a second front before the Magistrate: she may claim protection, residence, monetary relief, custody or compensation in that very proceeding, in addition to its own reliefs, and whether it began before or after the Act. The provision serves economy (one court, one family, one record), and it armed the defence recognised in Satish Chander Ahuja v. Sneha Ahuja, (2021) 1 SCC 414: the daughter-in-law sued for possession may set up her right of residence in the civil suit itself, and orders already passed under the Act are relevant, though not binding, in that suit.

2.2 Disclosure and the prevention of double recovery

Concurrency invites duplication, and the Act meets it with candour obligations. Sub-section (3) binds the woman to inform the Magistrate of any relief obtained elsewhere; Rajnesh v. Neha, (2021) 2 SCC 324, generalises the discipline for maintenance: every application must disclose earlier and pending maintenance proceedings, and amounts awarded in one forum are adjusted or set off in the other, the claimant chooses the fuller measure, never the sum of both. The same logic runs through Section 12(2): compensation paid under the Magistrate's order is set off against any later civil decree for damages on the same injuries. The remedies are cumulative; the recovery is single.

2.3 Concurrent jurisdiction without collision

The working rules that keep multiple forums in step:

Multiplicity is permitted, duplication is not: parallel proceedings on distinct causes (divorce, cruelty prosecution, DV application) coexist by design (Section 36); identical relief is not pursued twice, and later forums adjust for earlier awards.
Findings travel as evidence, not as res judicata: a Magistrate's DV order informs the civil or family court (Ahuja); an acquittal in the cruelty case does not, by itself, dissolve civil protection, the standards of proof differ.
Interim consistency: courts frame interim maintenance and custody so that orders complement rather than contradict, using the disclosure affidavits as the common ledger.
Forum choice belongs to her: Section 26 is an enabling provision; it neither compels consolidation nor bars the Magistrate's jurisdiction because another court is seized of the marriage.

⚠ Key point

Section 25: protection orders endure until the woman seeks discharge; every order bends to changed circumstances, on reasons recorded, and only prospectively (Vijikumari, 2024). Section 26: the reliefs of Sections 18 to 22 may be claimed in any civil, family or criminal proceeding between the parties, in addition to its own reliefs, subject to the woman's duty to disclose relief obtained elsewhere, cumulative remedies, adjusted awards, single recovery.

✦ Coaching analogy: 'one medicine, any pharmacy, one dosage record'

The Act's reliefs are the medicine; Section 26 stocks them in every pharmacy, the civil, family and criminal courts, so the patient need not cross town while ill. Section 25 is the prescription review: renewed as long as needed, revised when her condition changes. And the dosage record, disclosure under Section 26(3) and Rajnesh v. Neha, ensures no double dose is ever dispensed.

3. Related Topics and Provisions

Topic or provision	Connection
Protection orders (Topic 23)	Duration under Section 25(1)
Monetary relief (Topic 25)	Adjustment of overlapping maintenance
Right to reside (Topic 22)	The Section 26 defence in the owner's civil suit
Section 36: Act in addition to other laws	The foundation of concurrency
Section 29: appeals	Challenge, as distinct from alteration