The Allahabad High Court has quashed an FIR against the petitioners to the extent it pertained to allegations of sexual relations on the false promise of marriage, holding that Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) applies to cases involving deliberate deceit and not situations arising merely from disappointment.
The court also directed that investigation may go on under other sections but the arrest of the petitioners shall remain stayed. The court passed the order after it found that the petitioner and respondent had relations due to their liking and not because of a false promise of marriage. Thus, the FIR was lodged when the marriage, which was already settled, was cancelled due to some differences.
Allowing a writ petition filed by Neelesh Ramchandani, his father and another, a division bench comprising Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Abdul Shahid observed, “We are definitely of the view that Section 69 of BNS punishes deceit and not disappointment. In the instant case, we find that there was an agreement between the parties to marry and there was in fact no unilateral or deceitful promise by the first petitioner to the fourth respondent (girl) that he would marry her in near future.”
“The agreement therefore to marry was very much in existence between the parties. There was no false promise from either side. The FIR having been lodged at a time when the first petitioner thought that marriage was not possible for one reason or the other. We are also of the considered view that the evidence which has been provided in the writ petition definitely was to the extent that there was no false promise of marriage or deceitful means from the side of the first petitioner,” the bench observed.
{{/usCountry}}“The agreement therefore to marry was very much in existence between the parties. There was no false promise from either side. The FIR having been lodged at a time when the first petitioner thought that marriage was not possible for one reason or the other. We are also of the considered view that the evidence which has been provided in the writ petition definitely was to the extent that there was no false promise of marriage or deceitful means from the side of the first petitioner,” the bench observed.
{{/usCountry}}Two ingredients were essential for making out an offence under section 69 of BNS. First, if a man had sexual intercourse with a woman and the sexual intercourse was a result of a certain deceitful means adopted by the man or was a result of such a promise to marry the woman without any intention of getting married.
The fourth respondent (girl) lodged the FIR under some sections of BNS including section 69 on December 24 at Sector 63 of NOIDA, Gautam Budh Nagar, police station against the petitioner, his father and another.
Thereafter, the petitioners filed the present writ petition for a direction to quash the said FIR and, as an interim measure, issue a direction to the respondent police authorities not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of the impugned (under challenge) FIR. After hearing both sides, the court passed the above order on January 29.