Settlement Finality — Article 142 Divorce · 13 April 2026

Dhananjay Rathi v. Ruchika Rathi: Supreme Court on Finality of Mediated Divorce Settlements

Supreme Court of India · 2026 INSC 360; Criminal Appeal No. 1924 of 2026

The parties, married in 2000, separated around 2022-23, after which the husband filed a contested divorce petition. On a reference to court-supervised mediation, they signed a settlement agreement in May 2024 covering monetary payment, jewellery, and other terms, and began the process for a mutual-consent divorce. The husband complied with his obligations at the first motion in August 2024. Before the second motion, the wife withdrew her consent, alleging the husband had separately promised additional jewellery that was not recorded in the written agreement, and filed a complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 against the husband and his mother. The Delhi High Court, by an order dated 7 January 2026, passed interim directions in relation to those domestic violence proceedings, which the husband challenged before the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court held that a party who has accepted the benefits of a negotiated, court-supervised settlement cannot unilaterally resile from its terms without establishing a valid legal ground such as fraud or coercion — bare, unsubstantiated allegations are not enough, particularly where the settlement was reached with legal assistance and partly acted upon. Invoking its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Court dissolved the marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown, held that the fresh domestic violence complaint amounted to an abuse of process in the circumstances, and closed the related proceedings between the parties, while directing that any outstanding settlement obligations on either side be completed.

More about this case →