Author: Cheshta Singh, Agra College Faculty Of Law
To the Point
In recent years, Indian courts have witnessed a surge in criminal cases where consensual relationships later turn contentious and are alleged to be based on a false promise to marry. The core legal issue is whether such conduct amounts to rape by deception or merely constitutes a breach of promise. This article examines the evolving judicial approach to false promise to marry cases, focusing on consent, intention, and misuse of criminal law.
Use of Legal Jargon
This article employs legal terminology such as consent, misrepresentation, fraudulent inducement, mens rea, actus reus, vitiated consent, promise without intention, criminal liability, Section 63 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and abuse of process of law to analyse the subject from a doctrinal perspective.
The Proof (Statutory Framework)
Under Indian criminal law, sexual intercourse obtained on the basis of a false promise to marry may amount to rape if the promise was false from the very beginning and intended solely to obtain sexual consent.
With the enforcement of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), the concept continues under:
Section 63, BNS – Defines rape and recognises consent obtained through deception or false representation as invalid.
Consent must be free, voluntary, and informed.
A promise to marry made without any intention of fulfillment can vitiate consent.
However, a mere failure to marry due to later circumstances does not automatically attract criminal liability.
Abstract
The offence of rape hinges upon the absence of valid consent. Indian courts have consistently held that when consent for sexual relations is obtained by deception, particularly by a false promise of marriage, such consent stands vitiated. However, the judiciary has also cautioned against the misuse of rape laws in cases where relationships fail due to genuine reasons.
This article explores the fine legal distinction between a false promise to marry and a breach of promise, highlighting judicial tests applied to determine criminal culpability. It further analyses landmark case laws and discusses the balance between protecting women from exploitation and preventing misuse of criminal provisions.
Case Laws
1. Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra (2019)
The Supreme Court held that a false promise to marry constitutes rape only if:
The promise was false at the inception, and
The accused had no intention of marrying the woman from the very beginning.
The Court clarified that a mere breach of promise does not amount to rape.
2. Deepak Gulati v. State of Haryana (2013)
The Court observed that consensual sexual relations between adults, where the relationship fails later, cannot be criminalised unless there is clear evidence of deception and dishonest intention at the initial stage.
3. Sonu @ Subhash Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2021)
The Supreme Court reiterated that criminal law should not be used as a tool for settling personal scores and emphasised the need to distinguish emotional breakdowns from criminal acts
Conclusion
The offence of false promise to marry occupies a sensitive space in Indian criminal jurisprudence. Courts have rightly drawn a distinction between deceptive intent and relationship failure, ensuring that criminal liability arises only in genuine cases of exploitation.
The evolving judicial approach reflects maturity in interpreting consent, intention, and misuse of law. While the law must continue to protect women from deceit and abuse, it must equally prevent the erosion of criminal justice by frivolous prosecutions.
A nuanced, fact-based approach remains the cornerstone of adjudicating cases involving allegations of false promise to marry.