Allahabad High Court Rules Married Man's Promise to Marry Student Constitutes Deceit Under BNS
The Allahabad High Court has made a significant observation in a recent case. The court stated that a promise of marriage by a married man amounts to sexual intercourse through deceitful means under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). This ruling came as the court refused to quash criminal proceedings against a teacher accused of maintaining a sexual relationship with his student for over ten years.
Court Dismisses Petition Seeking Quashing of Charges
Justice Avnish Saxena delivered the judgment on Tuesday. He dismissed a petition filed by Kuldeep Verma under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The petition sought to quash the criminal proceedings against the accused. The court noted that the accused was already married when he entered into the relationship with the victim. Therefore, his alleged promise to marry her prima facie constituted "deceitful means" as defined under BNS Section 69.
Details of the Allegations Against the Teacher
The victim lodged an FIR at Quarsi police station in Aligarh on June 20, 2025. She filed the complaint under sections 69 and other provisions of the BNS. Her allegations included several serious claims:
- The accused engaged in sexual intercourse with her by making a false promise of marriage.
- Their relationship began around 2014-15, and he kept her as his wife but refused formal marriage.
- He only conducted a wedding ceremony at an Arya Samaj Temple, which she later discovered was not legally binding.
- He allegedly used violence, kicking and punching her during sexual encounters.
- He threatened to defame her if she spoke out about the relationship.
- She later found out he was already married and had three children.
Defense Arguments and Court's Analysis
The accused argued that the relationship was entirely consensual. He claimed it had continued since 2014 without coercion. He also contended that the allegation of a false promise of marriage could not stand. According to him, the victim herself stated they were married at an Arya Samaj Mandir, implying she knew the nature of their union.
The court examined these arguments carefully. It noted the victim's allegations that sexual relations began when she was unconscious. The court also considered the subsequent continuation of the relationship based on the promise of marriage. Justice Saxena emphasized a key point for the trial. Whether the victim actually knew about the accused's prior marriage remains a matter of evidence. This issue must be deciphered during the full trial proceedings.
Implications of the Ruling
This judgment reinforces the legal interpretation of deceit under the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. It clarifies that promises made by individuals already in a marital bond can be considered deceptive. The case highlights the court's stance on protecting individuals from exploitation in relationships. The refusal to quash proceedings ensures the matter will proceed to trial, where all evidence will be thoroughly examined.
