Rape on false promise to marry — Distinction between “false promise” and “breach of promise” Not every breach of promise to marry constitutes rape — To attract offence, promise must be false from inception and intended only to obtain consent — Consensual relationship turning sour does not justify criminal prosecution. (Paras 4, 6, 9–10, 13–15)

advocatemmmohan

Bail — BNSS, 2023 — Sections 480 & 483 — Offence under Section 69, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Grant of bail — Accused and victim both majors — Relationship admittedly consensual — Allegation based on promise to marry — Subsequent refusal to marry — Custody for considerable period — Investigation substantially completed — Bail granted with stringent conditions.
(Paras 1, 3, 15–16)

---

Rape on false promise to marry — Distinction between “false promise” and “breach of promise”

Not every breach of promise to marry constitutes rape — To attract offence, promise must be false from inception and intended only to obtain consent — Consensual relationship turning sour does not justify criminal prosecution.
(Paras 4, 6, 9–10, 13–15)

---

Consent — Section 69 BNS / Section 375 IPC principles — Misconception of fact

Consent is vitiated only when induced by a false promise given in bad faith at inception — Misconception spread over years negates inference of false promise — Long-term consensual relationship militates against allegation of rape.
(Paras 6, 10–12, 14–15)

---

Bail — Considerations

Length of custody — Completion of material part of investigation — Examination of witnesses — Fixed place of residence — Likelihood of absconding — Safeguards by imposing conditions.
(Para 3, 15–16)

---

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Bail

Mere invocation of provisions of the SC/ST Act does not bar grant of bail where facts disclose a consensual relationship and custodial interrogation is no longer required.
(Paras 1, 3, 15–16)

---

Judicial caution — Misuse of criminal law

Courts must guard against converting consensual relationships that later fail into criminal prosecutions for rape — Such misuse burdens courts and causes irreparable prejudice to the accused.
(Paras 4, 9, 14)

---

ANALYSIS (PARA-WISE SYNTHESIS)

1. Nature of allegations (Para 3)
   The accusation is founded on a love relationship between two adults, alleged promise of marriage, consensual physical relationship, and subsequent refusal to marry due to the accused’s engagement elsewhere.

2. Custody and investigation status (Para 3)
   The petitioner was in judicial custody for 78 days; nine witnesses were examined and the material part of the investigation stood completed.

3. Legal position on promise to marry (Paras 4–12)
   The Court surveyed Supreme Court jurisprudence holding that:

   • A false promise must exist from inception.

   • A mere breach of promise or failure due to later circumstances does not amount to rape.

   • Consent given in a prolonged relationship generally indicates conscious choice.

4. Application of law to facts (Paras 13–15)
   The relationship appeared consensual; both parties were of the same age; the alleged misconception extended over several years, which negated the inference of a false promise at inception.

5. Exercise of bail jurisdiction (Paras 15–16)
   Considering the nature of allegations, custody period, and settled legal principles, the Court found the petitioner entitled to bail, subject to stringent conditions to secure investigation and trial.

---

RATIO DECIDENDI

1. A consensual sexual relationship between adults, founded on a promise to marry, does not amount to rape unless the promise was false from the very inception and made solely to obtain consent.

2. A breach of promise to marry, or a relationship subsequently turning sour, cannot by itself attract criminal liability under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Consent alleged to be vitiated by misconception of fact must be shown to have arisen from a false promise given in bad faith at the inception of the relationship.

4. Prolonged consensual intimacy between adults militates against an inference of rape based on misconception of fact.

5. In bail matters, where the accused has spent substantial time in custody, investigation is substantially complete, and the relationship appears consensual, continued incarceration is unwarranted and bail may be granted with appropriate conditions.