The purpose of this paper is to highlight the implications of the mediation upon the unfolding and the resolution of the criminal trial in those cases where the law allows parties to follow this procedure and the parties choose to solve their dispute without the judicial intervention. From the very beginning it must be stated that the mediation is only allowed in case of crimes for which the withdrawal of the complaint or the parties’ reconciliation removes criminal liability. So that, we are talking about those crimes for which the state has waived the action in favour of the injured person who has the right to decide if she requests the state’s aid to draw the criminal liability of the wrongdoer or not. Another important aspect refers to the procedural guarantees established for the parties during the criminal proceedings, which are also recognized during the mediation. The parties, if they have full capacity of exercise, may waive these guarantees without any consequences upon the validity of the mediation or the reconciliation during the mediation. Which is the situation of the under age and which are the procedural guarantees which must be provided as required for the reconciliation spoke to effect? The mediation can occur both before the criminal trial and during its unfolding, in which case it leads to the suspension of criminal proceedings for no more than 3 months from the date of signing the contract mediation. What is happening if it is not possible to finish mediation in the 3 months provided by the law? Has no effect the late reconciliation in front of the mediator? Another question may rise as to the meaning of the signing of the mediation contract. What happens if the injured person dies after filing the complaint and after signing the contract mediation? Is it still possible to draw the criminal liability of the wrongdoer? But if the wrongdoer has accepted mediation but this does not lead to parties’ reconciliation? It is possible to draw a conclusion on the recognition of guilt by the defendant?