Introduction
Section 69 of BNS deals with sexual intercourse by the means of deception and false promise to marry,
and the marriage not having been performed with the said intention.
There have been certain specified cases dealt with under this provision, which have shed light on the cases of consent obtained through false promise to marry.
False promise to marry differs from a promise to marry which fails to be performed.
This is primarily because a sexual relationship initiated with the promise to marry but later on which fails to do so, does not ipso facto attract the provision of section 69 BNS.
The reason behind making such a promise at the time of initiating the relationship, which later on fails to be performed, assumes relevance in deciding whether the promise was false from the beginning.
The recent judgment by the Honorable Supreme Court on the interpretation of section 69 BNS further clarifies the difference between a promise to marry that fails to be performed and a false promise to marry attracting the provisions of section 69 BNS.
What is section 69 BNS?
Under the BNS,2023 section 69 prescribes a punishment for sexual intercourse by deception or by making a false promise to marry if the sexual intercourse does not amount to rape.
As per this section, whoever has sexual intercourse with a woman by means of deception or by making a promise to marry her without any intention of keeping the promise shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term that may extend to ten years and a fine.
Explanation to section 69 says that “deceitful means” shall include giving inducement for, or false promise of, employment or promotion
at work or marrying another person by concealment of identity.
Therefore, for cases falling under the false promise to marry, having the promise itself would not be sufficient for prosecution;
the prosecution needs to prove that the accused had no intention of keeping the promise at the time of making it .
Thus, the intention to deceive would be a relevant consideration for determining the applicability of section 69 BNS.
False promise to marry and breach thereof under section 69 BNS
A false promise to marry and mere breach of promise to marry are not the same according to law. These are two different things and can not be treated the same way.
Difference between Promise To Marry and Breach Of Promise
The promise to marry can be false only if a person has no intention to marry from the beginning and uses
that promise as a tool to get into a relationship with someone to have sexual intercourse with them. Therefore, when a promise of marriage is made, the intention of the person making the promise should be scrutinized.
On the other hand, a promise to marry can turn out to be untrue in the future because of certain circumstances or events that
that make a person change his mind about getting married.
A promise to marry is a promise, after all. It needs to be fulfilled, regardless of what circumstances change in the meantime. Therefore, if a person breaks his promise to marry, that does not necessarily mean that his promise was false from the beginning.
The apex court in India has made several observations about the law relating to promise of marriage and breach thereof. They stress that the court should not jump to conclusions about the false promise to marry just because the marriage was not able to take place.
The situation in which the promise was made as well as the conduct of the promisor and the promise itself, has to be taken into account.
Therefore, when determining whether a promise to marry is false or not,
the court should look into the circumstances and the intention of
the promisor at the time when the promise was made.
Therefore, the relevant question before the court while dealing with
Section 69 BNS cases would not be “was marriage solemnized ?”
but rather “ did the promise make the promise with no intention to marry ?”.
Recent Supreme Court Judgement
In Kunal Rameshbhai Kalyani v. State of Gujarat, 2026, the Supreme Court was called upon to decide whether a later refusal to marry could result in a person being found guilty under section 69 BNS.
The incident that led to the FIR being filed was the accused promising to marry the complainant,
and a subsequent physical relationship taking place. This was followed by the accused refusing to marry the complainant, citing the opposition from his mother.
The Supreme Court concluded that for the promise to marry to be found to be false under section 69 BNS,
it must have been made without the expectation for the marriage to take place from the beginning.
A subsequent refusal to comply with the promise was not enough to constitute a false pretence of its own,
and the FIR was quashed by the Supreme Court, finding that no evidence was present to demonstrate
that the marriage proposal was false at the time it was originally made.
What must be proved under Section 69 BNS?
For the provision of section 69 BNS to be applied in the cases of promises to marry,
it is not enough to prove that the marriage was not enough to prove that
the marriage was not actually solemnized.
It is necessary to establish that the promise was made by one party with the knowledge
that it would not carry it out.
Therefore, it is important to consider all circumstances of the case when studying such cases.
Therefore, in some cases, it may be relevant to analyze the conduct of the parties,
the specific wording of the promise, and the evidence
presented to prove that there was no fraudulent intent from the beginning of the relationship.
Consequently, when considering cases under section 69 BNS,
it is important to consider the initial intentions of the parties and not just the outcome of the relationship.
Earlier Supreme Court Approach
The earlier approach of the Supreme Court regarding matters about false promise of marriage aligns with the judgment that has been delivered in the present case of Section 69 BNS.
In Deepak Gulati v. State of Haryana (2013), the Supreme Court made a distinction between a false promise of marriage from the very beginning and a love affair gone bad.
The Supreme Court held that it becomes necessary to look into
the circumstances and the intention with which the promise was made.
In Promod Suryabhan v. State of Maharashtra (2019), the Supreme Court again stated that while determining if the promise of marriage is false, it becomes necessary to consider whether it was made in bad faith and without any intention of fulfilling it at the time of its making, and that there must be a nexus between false promise of marriage and sexual relationship.
These principles have been applied by the Supreme Court while interpreting Section 69 BNS.
Observation on the Judgment
The Supreme Court decision in the present case is of great importance in interpreting the scope of application of Section 69 BNS. The ruling makes it clear that calling off the relationship or the marriage not taking place does not itself constitute a sufficient basis for invoking the provision.
The main point of the decision lies in the fact that for a promise to marry to qualify as an essential ingredient, it has to be proven that it was not made honestly. Such an approach allows the court to distinguish between the situation when a suitor had no intention to marry from the beginning and the scenarios when the promise was fulfilled in good faith but could not be completed due to unforeseen circumstances.
Thus, the ruling highlights the need to focus on the intention and factual situation at the moment of promise as a key determine if section 69 BNS applies.
Conclusion
The provision of section 69of the BNS is meant to punish any sexual intercourse that is had upon a promise of marriage that was deceitful from the beginning.
The recent decision from the Supreme Court reminds us again that the failure to fulfill the promise to marry can not be considered as a basis for this provision to take effect.
The focus should be put on the intentions concerning the promise and the evidence for the promise. And so the judgment distinguishes between promise, which are really made and those that are claimed to have been used in order to deceive.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is section 69 BNS?
Section 69 BNS pertains to sexual intercourse by deception, using a promise to
marry, with an absence of intention of keeping the promise.
- Does refusal to marry attract section 69 BNS?
The mere refusal by the promised party to marry at a later date would not be sufficient to infer that the promise to marry was made with an absence of intention from the start.
- What is a promise to marry made without the intention of keeping it in the context of Section 69 BNS?
A promise to marry without the intention of keeping it is the basis for Section 69 of the BNS Act.
- What was the ruling of the Supreme Court in Kunal Rameshbhai Kalyani?
The Supreme Court ruled that a subsequent refusal to marry would not be sufficient evidence as to the initial promise to marry being false.
- Why was the initial intention behind the promise to marry important?
Since the promise to marry had to have been made without any intention to keep it, it became crucial to determine the initial intention at the time of making the promise.
References
