False Promise of Marriage & Section 69 BNS
Some rape cases involve allegations based on a false promise of marriage, where women give consent to sexual relations believing marriage will follow.
Critics argue this undermines women’s agency, especially when consent was freely given.
Instead of removing this issue from law, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, introduced Section 69, creating a new, separate offence for sexual intercourse under false promise of marriage.
Section 69 carries a lesser punishment than rape under Section 63 BNS (former Section 375 IPC).
Court Limitations & Judicial Reasoning
Courts have narrowed the scope of such cases:
In Anurag Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh (2019), the Supreme Court said it is only rape if the man never intended to marry from the beginning.
In Rajnish Singh v. State of U.P. (2025), a 15-year-long consensual relationship was not considered rape; the Court said there was no deception.
In Abhishek Arjariya v. State of M.P. (2025), the Court ruled that a married woman cannot claim her consent was vitiated by a false promise to marry.
Legal Overlap & Redundancy of Section 69
Section 69 overlaps with existing laws:
The definition of consent in Section 28 BNS includes “misconception of fact”, which already covers false promises.
This means such cases are already punishable under the rape provision (Section 63 BNS).
Creating a new, lesser offence under Section 69 may be unconstitutional under Article 14 (equality before law), unless it is made an official exception to rape law.
Practical and Legal Recommendations
Courts have often quashed such FIRs, citing lack of intent to deceive or prolonged consensual relationships.
Police should conduct a preliminary inquiry before filing charges to avoid misuse and unnecessary legal action.
This approach will reduce burden on courts and protect individuals from unjust prosecution.
COMMENTS