The ruling in all of this is the same as the ruling in the case of the woman divorced three times.

Section: If he divorces her three times, then denies the divorce, she does not inherit from him. Ahmad stated this clearly, and it is the view of Qatada, Abu Hanifa, Abu Yusuf, al-Shafi'i, and Ibn al-Mundhir. Al-Hasan said: She inherits from him because she is, in outward appearance, in the status of a wife. Our position is that she knows she is a stranger [to him], therefore she does not inherit from him, like all other stranger women. In a report from Abu Talib, Ahmad said: She should flee from him and not marry until he makes his divorce public and she knows of it. If he comes and claims her as his wife, she is returned to him and [in such a case] she would be punished. If he dies without admitting to the divorce, she does not inherit from him; she should not take what is not hers. She should flee from him, but not leave the town; rather, she should hide in her town. He was asked: Some people say she should kill him, as she is in the position of one defending herself. He did not like that. Thus, he forbade her from marrying before the proof of her divorce; because she is, according to the outward ruling, the wife of this divorcer. So, if she were to marry another, she would be liable, according to the outward Sharia, for punishment and being returned to the first [husband], and she would be in the position of having two husbands—this one in the outward appearance of the matter, and that one in its inner reality. He did not permit her to leave the town, because that strengthens the suspicion of her recalcitrance (nushuz), nor did he permit her to kill him intentionally; for one defending herself does not kill intentionally. However, if she intended to defend herself and it resulted in his death, there is no sin upon her, nor is there any liability in the inner reality (batin). As for the outward appearance (zahir), she is treated according to the ruling on killing, unless her truthfulness is proven.

Section: Ahmad said: If he divorces her three times, and four people testify against him that he had intercourse with her, the hadd (prescribed) punishment is to be carried out against him. He made it obligatory only because she became a stranger through the divorce, so she is like all other stranger women; in fact, she is more strictly forbidden, as she is forbidden for both intercourse and marriage. If he denies the divorce and has intercourse with her, then evidence is produced proving the divorce, there is no hadd punishment upon him. This is the view of al-Sha'bi, Malik, the people of the Hijaz, al-Thawri, al-Awza'i, Rabi'a, al-Shafi'i, Abu Thawr, and Ibn al-Mundhir; because his denial of the divorce suggests to us that he [forgot it, and that] is a doubt (shubha) in warding off the hadd punishment from him, and we have no way to know his knowledge of the divorce