Married woman cannot claim she was coerced into sex on false promise of marriage: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently observed that a married woman cannot allege that she was coerced into sex under the false promise of marriage.

However, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas also made it clear that each case with allegations of rape or deceitful sex on false promise of marriage must be considered in light of its specific set of facts and circumstances.

"It is observed that while considering the cases alleging rape on the basis of the promise of marriage, it is difficult for this Court at this juncture to enter into a conclusion regarding whether the relationship was consensual or not. The entire circumstances will have to be taken into consideration especially when a married lady enters into a physical relationship with another person. If both of the parties are aware about a subsistent marriage it cannot be alleged that the sexual intercourse between them was with a promise to marry," the Court's order said.

The order was passed on a bail application moved by a man who was charged under Sections 84 (enticing or taking away with criminal intent a married woman) and 69 (sexual intercourse by deceitful means) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The latter section includes false promise of marriage within the definition of deceitful means and is punishable with up to 10 years imprisonment.

The prosecution case against the petitioner (accused) was that he sexually assaulted a woman after falsely promising to marry her. He was also accused of having threatened to publish her photos and videos after borrowing ₹2.5 lakh from her.

He was arrested on June 13 and has been behind bars since then.

The petitioner's counsel refuted all allegations and claimed that that they arose from a financial claim. He argued that the allegation of rape under the promise of marriage was taken up only to ensure that the petitioner yields to the woman's financial demands.

The Court observed that as per the precedents set by the High Court on Section 376 of the now repealed Indian Penal Code (IPC), there cannot be a promise of marriage when one of the parties is in a subsisting marriage.

Since the complainant in this case is a married woman, it is prima facie doubtful whether the corresponding offence under Section 69 of the BNS can be attracted, the Court said.

It also noted that the other offence alleged under Section 84 of the BNS is a bailable one.

Considering these factors, the Court deemed it fit to grant bail to the petitioner.

The petitioner was represented by advocates Ameen Hassan K and Rebin Vincent Gralan.

Public Prosecutor Noushad KA appeared for the State.

[Read Order]