The Karnataka High Court has held that a false promise to marry a woman after consensual sex does not amount to an offence of using deceitful means to to obtain sexual intercourse under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) [Mohammed Ayan v. State of Karnataka].
While granting bail to a man accused of the offence, Justice S Vishwajith Shetty held,
"The alleged promise to marry victim girl is after the act of sexual intercourse committed by him. For the purpose of attracting the offence punishable under Section 69 of BNS, 2023, a person should have sexual intercourse with a woman by deceitful means or by making promise to marry a woman without intention of fulfilling the same, not amounting to the offence of rape."
The complainant met the petitioner at her workplace and was aware of him being in a relationship with another woman. On January 6, 2026, the petitioner allegedly proposed that they have sexual intercoursem which the complainant alleged she refused consent for.
After the act, the petitioner promised the complainant that he would marry her and continued the relationship with her.
The complainant lodged a complaint with the police when the petitioner stopped communicating with her. The petitioner refused to marry her because his parents did not approve of the marriage.
After a first information report (FIR) was registered, the petitioner was taken into judicial custody during the course of investigation. He then sought bail before the lower court, which was rejected. Subsequently, he approached the High Court.
The High Court enlarged him on conditional bail with a ₹1,00,000 personal bond with two sureties. It further directed the petitioner to appear before the trial court regularly and not leave the jurisdiction of the trial court without prior permission.
Senior Advocate Tomy Sebastian along with Advocate Alwyn Sebastian appeared for the petitioner.
High Court Government Pleader Channappa Erappa appeared for the State.
Advocate Abdul Majid appeared for the complainant.
[Read Order]