The Supreme Court has ruled that a spouse cannot withdraw from a mutual divorce settlement after agreeing to dissolve the marriage as part of a full and final resolution of disputes. A Bench of Justices Rajesh Bindal and Vijay Bishnoi clarified that although the law permits withdrawal of consent before the final decree of divorce, this right cannot be misused to evade obligations agreed upon in a settlement. The Court emphasized that once parties mutually agree on separation terms, they are bound by them and cannot later step back without valid legal grounds.
The Court further stressed the sanctity of mediation settlements, noting that such agreements form the backbone of dispute resolution in matrimonial cases. It held that any party attempting to renege on a mediated settlement without justification should face strict consequences, including heavy costs. The Bench observed that deviations from settlement terms undermine the entire mediation process. However, it also clarified that withdrawal may be permitted in exceptional circumstances, such as when the agreement is vitiated by fraud, coercion, undue influence, or non-compliance by the other party.
The ruling came in a case where a wife withdrew consent for mutual divorce after partially acting on a mediation settlement and later initiated domestic violence proceedings. The Supreme Court found these allegations to be an afterthought and termed the case “premeditated,” especially since they arose after over two decades of marriage and only following a dispute over the settlement. Setting aside the Delhi High Court’s order, the apex court quashed the domestic violence proceedings, calling them an abuse of legal process. Observing that the marriage had irretrievably broken down, the Court dissolved the marriage and directed both parties to comply with the remaining terms of the settlement.