Criminal revision in matrimonial disputes may be disposed of based on a voluntary settlement.

The applicant (wife) and respondent no. 2 (husband) were married on 15.02.2013

The applicant alleged that following the marriage, the respondent and his family demanded a dowry of Rs. 20,00,000 and subjected her to physical and mental cruelty

After being deserted in 2015, the applicant filed a complaint under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the IPC

The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, acquitted the respondent on 14.09.2021, citing a lack of sufficient evidence

This acquittal was subsequently affirmed by the 3rd Additional Session Judge, Bilaspur, on 08.06.2023

The applicant challenged these concurrent findings through the present criminal revision

During the pendency of this revision, the parties reached an amicable settlement before the Family Court, Bilaspur, where the respondent agreed to pay Rs. 6,00,000 as a full and final settlement

Whether the High Court can exercise its revisional jurisdiction to dispose of a criminal proceeding arising from matrimonial disputes on the basis of a voluntary compromise between the parties

The Court exercised its revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), 1973

In matters arising from matrimonial discord, where parties have amicably resolved their differences, the Court may intervene to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the legal process

The Court noted that the dispute was essentially matrimonial in nature and had been resolved independently by the parties

Pursuant to the Court's direction on 16.02.2026, the Additional Registrar (Judicial) verified the compromise, certifying that it was entered into voluntarily and without coercion

The Court reasoned that since the parties had decided to give "quietus" to their disputes and the respondent had fulfilled the financial terms of the settlement (Rs. 6,00,000), no grievance survived

The Court determined that continuing the criminal revision against the concurrent judgments of acquittal would be an "exercise in futility" given the restoration of harmony and the parties' desire to live independently

The Court held that the amicable settlement effectively resolved the matrimonial dispute, and the compromise deed was ordered to form part of the final order

No further grievance or litigation survived between the parties