When Promises of Marriage Lead to Courts: MP High Court Denies Quashing of FIR under BNS

In a significant judicial development regarding the application of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior has reaffirmed that disputes involving sexual relations under a contested promise of marriage are best resolved through the crucible of a trial. Justice Rajesh Kumar Gupta dismissed a petition seeking to quash an FIR, ruling that the allegations of “deceitful means” require a deeper appreciation of evidence that goes beyond the scope of a preliminary challenge.

A Relationship and a Broken Promise

The case stems from a complaint filed by a resident of Village Rasilpur, who alleged that the petitioner, Raju, had engaged in a physical relationship with her for over a year under the false pretext of marriage. According to the prosecutrix, the petitioner had convinced her to divorce her husband, promising to marry her once the legal separation was complete.

The narrative took a dramatic turn in late November 2024, when the pair allegedly traveled to Gwalior with the understanding that their union would be formalized. Following the, trip the petitioner allegedly refused to proceed with the marriage. This refusal triggered the registration of FIR No. 180 of 2024 at Police Station Matabasaiya, invoking sections 64(2)(m) and 87 of the BNS.

Arguments from Both Sides

Counsel for the petitioner argued that the prosecutrix had falsely implicated him, pointing to a neighborly dispute and urging the court to quash the proceedings based on established Supreme Court precedents regarding the misuse of such laws. They contended that the interaction was consensual and did not amount to criminal deceit.

Conversely, the State argued that the FIR, when read at face value, clearly outlines a cognizable offense. The prosecution maintained that whether the consent was truly voluntary or obtained through a calculated fabrication—essentially the core of "deceitful means" under Section 69 of the BNS—is a question of fact that must be tested during the trial process.

The Court’s Legal Reasoning

Justice Rajesh Kumar Gupta focused on the application of the relatively new Section 69 of the BNS, which specifically addresses sexual intercourse obtained via deceit or false promises. The Court emphasized that it was not tasked with conducting a "mini-trial" to determine the absolute truth of the allegations at this preliminary stage.

The judgment clarifies that the judicial threshold for quashing an FIR under Article 226 is restricted to whether the complaint, if taken as true, establishes a prima facie case. In this instance, the Court found that the allegations were not so "inherently improbable" as to warrant summary dismissal.

Key Observations

• On the Nature of the Offense: “From a plain reading of Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, it is evident that where a person, by deceitful means or by making a promise to marry a woman without any intention of fulfilling the same, establishes sexual intercourse with her—such act not amounting to rape—the same constitutes a distinct offence.”
• On the Limitations of the Court: “At this stage, this Court is not required to meticulously examine the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations, nor to conduct a mini trial.”
• On the Necessity of Trial: “The question as to whether the promise to marry was false from its inception, whether the consent of the prosecutrix was obtained by deceitful means... are matters which require appreciation of evidence and can only be adjudicated during trial.”

The Verdict and Its Implications

The High Court’s refusal to quash the FIR underscores the judiciary’s stance that, under the BNS framework, claims of sexual deception are complex, fact-heavy scenarios. By dismissing the petition, the Court has signaled that the legal system expects such matters to be scrutinized through witness testimonies and cross-examinations during the trial phase. For future cases, this ruling suggests a high barrier for petitioners hoping to exit criminal complaints at the threshold, reinforcing that the promise of marriage, when linked to intimate relations, carries significant legal weight under the current penal code.