01Facts
The parties married on 15 December 2018 and had a daughter. Following matrimonial disputes, the wife lodged Jamalpur P.S. Case No. 140 of 2022 and sought divorce under Section 13(i)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Family Court dismissed her petition, and she appealed under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984.
¶ 2–3During the appeal, the parties reached an amicable settlement and filed a joint compromise petition. The husband handed the wife a demand draft for ₹5 lakh in court.
¶ 4–602Issues
i.Whether the appeal seeking dissolution of marriage could be allowed on the basis of the parties’ amicable settlement.
¶ 5, 7–8ii.Whether the pending criminal proceedings arising from the parties’ matrimonial dispute should be quashed or closed in light of their settlement.
¶ 9–1003Law Applied
The appeal was brought under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, against the dismissal of a divorce petition under Section 13(i)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
¶ 2–3The judgment records that the parties jointly sought disposal of the appeal in accordance with their settlement and undertook to comply with its terms.
¶ 7It cites no precedent or specific statutory provision as the basis for quashing the criminal proceedings, and states no general legal test governing either relief.
¶ 8–12Provisions in the judgment · 8 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Family Courts Act, 1984 Section 19
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 13
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 315Section 323Section 324Section 307Section 406Section 34
04Reasoning
The Court accepted the parties’ joint request to resolve the matrimonial dispute by settlement rather than adjudicate the merits of the wife’s original cruelty claim.
¶ 7–8It noted that the husband had delivered the ₹5 lakh demand draft to the wife in court, with her receipt endorsed and placed on record. On that basis, it set aside the Family Court’s dismissal and dissolved the marriage.
¶ 6It also directed that the pending criminal proceedings identified in the compromise petition be quashed or closed, and required the parties to abide by their settlement and not bring further cases against each other concerning their matrimonial dispute.
¶ 9, 11–1205Holding
The appeal was allowed on the basis of compromise. The Family Court’s order dated 9 October 2025 was set aside, the marriage was dissolved, and the decree was directed to be drawn accordingly.
¶ 12–13The Court also quashed or closed the specified pending criminal proceedings and permitted the parties to produce a certified copy of its order before the court where those proceedings were pending.
¶ 9–10Original Court PDF
Priyanka KumarivsSudhir Kumar
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
