"Live-In Was Consensual, Deceit Not Attributable": Ranchi Court Grants Bail To Man In Promise-To-Marry Case
The petitioner, who was arrested and placed in judicial custody on May 29, 2025, in connection with an FIR registered under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS);
A Court in Ranchi has recently granted bail to a man accused of allegedly establishing a physical relationship with a woman under the false promise of marriage, ruling that the relationship appeared consensual between two adults in a live-in arrangement, and that the allegation of deceit was not prima facie sustainable.
Judicial Commissioner Anil Kumar Mishra said, "Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as taking into account the custody period, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail."
Brief Facts of the Case
The petitioner, who was arrested and placed in judicial custody on May 29, 2025, in connection with Argora P.S. Case No. 75/2025 registered under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
The prosecution’s case, based on a written complaint by the 29-year-old woman, alleged that she had met the petitioner on December 26, 2023, and they entered into a romantic relationship.
According to the complainant, the petitioner promised to marry her, and the two began cohabiting in a rented house in Pipartoli, Argora, Ranchi. However, on April 11, 2025, the petitioner allegedly left the premises without informing her, taking all his belongings with him. When later confronted, he denied any intention to marry her, prompting her to file the case.
Bail Hearing
During the bail hearing, Advocate Shashank Shekhar Jha for the petitioner argued that both parties were consenting adults who had willingly lived together for over one and a half years.
The Counsel further contended that the allegations lacked specificity, were general in nature, and that the petitioner had committed no offence as defined under the relevant provisions of the BNS. He also emphasized that "no specific overt act" was attributed to the petitioner and highlighted his cooperation with the investigation, stating that no further custodial interrogation was warranted. Therefore, a plea for a lenient view was made, citing prolonged custody.
Public Prosecutor Anil Kumar Singh, however, vehemently opposed the bail plea, urging the court to consider the seriousness of the alleged offence.
Court's Order
After hearing both sides and examining the materials on record, the Court observed that the complainant, being an adult, had voluntarily chosen to be in a live-in relationship with the petitioner.
“A appraisal of the contents of written report would make it manifest that victim being a major lady was aware with the consequences of the act which have been alleged in the written report but despite she choose to remain in physical relation. Hence the victim of persuasion deceit etc as alleged does not appear attributable. Petitioner is in custody since 29.5.2025. This court is of the opinion that no further custodial interrogation is required. Petitioner is ready to cooperate in the investigation,” the Court noted in its order dated June 18.
Taking into account the custody period and the nature of allegations, the Court found no reason to continue the petitioner's judicial custody and ordered his release on bail.
The Court directed the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount and submit a self-attested copy of his Aadhaar card along with an active mobile number, which he must not change without the court’s prior permission.
The Court further directed the petitioner that he must cooperate with the investigation and warned that any non-compliance may result in the cancellation of his bail.
Case Title: ABC v. Victim