In a recent decision, the Kerala High Court made an important observation on rape cases involving false promises of marriage. The court clearly stated that if a woman is already married, she cannot claim that sexual relations with another man were based on a false promise to marry.
This statement came during a hearing on a bail plea, where the accused faced charges under the new Indian criminal code for alleged sexual assault and cheating.
What the Court Said on Marriage Promises and Consent
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, who heard the case, said that when a woman is already married and still enters into a relationship with another man, it becomes difficult to accept that the relationship was based on the hope of marriage.
The judge noted that when both parties are aware of the woman’s marital status, the promise of marriage cannot be considered valid or realistic. In such cases, the relationship is more likely based on mutual consent rather than any misunderstanding or deceit.
Understanding the Case Background
The man who approached the court for bail was accused of forming a sexual relationship with a woman by falsely promising to marry her. Along with this, the prosecution claimed he threatened to leak her photos and videos and even took ₹2.5 lakh from her.
The man had been in jail since 13 June. His lawyer strongly denied the charges and argued that the woman made the complaint to pressure the man into meeting financial demands.
Court Grants Bail and Explains Its View
The court looked closely at the facts and pointed out that the woman involved in the case is already married. So, under the new Indian criminal law (BNS), the court found it doubtful whether a case could be made based on a marriage promise.
The court explained that in cases where either party is already married, a future marriage cannot be assumed as a reason for consent to physical relations. The judge further added that such situations must be analysed with care, and general laws on rape due to false promises cannot be blindly applied.
In this case, the accused had been charged under Section 69 (for sexual relations based on a false promise of marriage) and Section 84 (for luring a married woman with bad intent) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Section 69 also allows imprisonment up to 10 years.
The court found the bail plea justified and allowed the petitioner to be released under conditions.
