New Delhi, April 2026: The Supreme Court of India has held that a spouse cannot withdraw consent for mutual divorce after agreeing to dissolve the marriage as part of a full and final settlement of disputes, emphasizing the binding nature of mediated settlements.
A Bench comprising Justices Vijay Bishnoi and Rajesh Bindal observed that while the law permits withdrawal of consent before a decree of divorce is passed, such withdrawal cannot be used to evade obligations undertaken in a settlement agreement.
Settlement Terms Cannot Be Disregarded
The Court underscored that once parties enter into a settlement through mediation and act upon it, they are bound by its terms.
It observed that:
“Any deviation from the terms of the settlement… should be dealt with strictly,”
highlighting that allowing parties to backtrack would undermine the very foundation of mediation as a dispute resolution mechanism.
The Bench further clarified that a party resiling from such settlement may face serious consequences, including costs.
Limited Grounds To Withdraw From Settlement
The Court clarified that withdrawal from a settlement is permissible only in exceptional circumstances, such as:
- Fraud
- Coercion
- Undue influence
- Non-compliance by the other party
Outside these limited grounds, parties are expected to honour commitments made during mediation.
Case Background
The ruling arose from a matrimonial dispute where:
- The parties, married in 2000, began living separately in 2022–23
- The husband initiated divorce proceedings, which were referred to mediation
- A settlement agreement was executed, including financial terms and mutual consent divorce
- The first motion for divorce was completed after partial compliance
However, before the second motion, the wife withdrew her consent and later initiated proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act.
Supreme Court Flags Abuse Of Process
The Court found that the domestic violence proceedings were “premeditated” and an “afterthought”, noting that allegations surfaced only after disputes arose regarding the settlement.
Holding that continuation of such proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law, the Court quashed the DV case.
Divorce Granted Under Article 142
Taking note of the prolonged dispute and lack of any possibility of reconciliation, the Court held that the marriage had irretrievably broken down.
Invoking its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Court:
- Granted a decree of divorce
- Directed compliance with the settlement terms
- Brought an end to all pending disputes between the parties
The ruling reflects the Court’s approach to ensure complete justice and finality in matrimonial litigation.
Key Takeaways
- Mutual divorce consent cannot be withdrawn after acting on a settlement
- Mediation agreements are binding and enforceable
- Courts will not allow misuse of criminal proceedings post-settlement
- Article 142 can be invoked to dissolve irretrievably broken marriages
Conclusion
This judgment reinforces the legal sanctity of settlement agreements in matrimonial disputes, sending a clear message that parties cannot approbate and reprobate—accept benefits under a settlement and later disown it.
By quashing subsequent proceedings and dissolving the marriage, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed its commitment to prevent abuse of process and uphold the integrity of mediation.
