Promise of Marriage by Married Man Can Vitiate Consent, Attracts Section 69 BNS: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court recently refused to quash criminal proceedings against a man accused of having sexual relations with a woman for over a decade on the false promise of marriage, holding that the allegations disclosed a prima facie case under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, which criminalises sexual intercourse by deceitful means.

The application was filed by Kuldeep Verma, who sought quashing of the charge sheet, the cognizance order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh, and the trial proceedings arising from an FIR lodged in June 2025. The FIR accused Verma of offences under Sections 69, 115(2), 352 and 351(3) of the BNS, including sexual intercourse by deceitful means, voluntarily causing hurt, intentional insult, and criminal intimidation.

According to the prosecution, the complainant and the accused were in a relationship for about 11 years and lived together in the accused’s house. The woman alleged that the accused repeatedly engaged in sexual relations with her on the assurance that he would marry her, while concealing the fact that he was already married and had children. She claimed that the first sexual act took place when she was rendered unconscious after being administered a sedative, and that subsequent acts were based on the promise of marriage.

The complainant further alleged that she was subjected to physical assault, including an incident on 27 May 2025 in which she suffered a knee injury. She also accused the applicant of threatening to defame her if she spoke about the relationship. The FIR stated that although the accused initially agreed at the police station to keep her with him, he later reneged and threatened to implicate her and her family in false cases.

In her statements recorded during investigation, the complainant maintained that she believed herself to be the accused’s wife and that a marriage ceremony had been performed at an Arya Samaj Mandir on 24 April 2025. A marriage certificate was filed before the court to support this claim. She asserted that despite repeated requests for a formal ceremonial marriage, the accused refused and eventually abandoned her.

Opposing the prosecution case, the accused argued that the relationship was entirely consensual and that the complainant was aware of his marital status for several years. He relied on an internal police inquiry report from 2018, which recorded that the complainant had withdrawn an earlier complaint after stating that she did not wish to pursue the matter. The accused also contended that the allegations of sexual intercourse on a false promise of marriage could not stand when the complainant herself claimed that they were married.

The State and the complainant, however, argued that the accused’s marital status was deliberately concealed and that the promise of marriage was false from the beginning. They submitted that the complainant was initially unaware that the accused was already married and that the deception vitiated her consent.

After examining the record, the bench of Justice Avnish Saxena held that the allegations, taken at face value, disclosed sufficient material to proceed with the trial.

Court noted that Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is a new provision that specifically criminalises sexual intercourse obtained by deceitful means, including a false promise of marriage, even when the act does not amount to rape.

Court observed that the accused was admittedly married at the time he entered into a relationship with the complainant, and that it would be a matter of trial to determine whether the complainant was aware of this fact and whether her consent was obtained through deception. At the stage of considering a quashing petition, the court said, it could not conduct a detailed examination of disputed facts.

Holding that the continuance of proceedings could not be termed an abuse of the process of law, the high court dismissed the application and allowed the criminal trial to proceed.

Case Title: Kuldeep Verma vs State of UP and Another

Order Date: January 13, 2026

Bench: Justice Avnish Saxena