A marriage promise made after initial intercourse does not, by itself, attract Section 69 BNS.

The petitioner was arrested in Crime No. 231/2026 of Indiranagar Police Station for an alleged offence under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”), based on a complaint by a 25-year-old woman.

She alleged that the petitioner had sexual relations with her on several occasions after promising to marry her, but later refused to do so.

In her statement recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”), she stated that the petitioner had sexual intercourse with her before making the promise to marry; she also described subsequent sexual encounters.

The Sessions Court rejected his bail application.

After investigation was completed and the charge sheet filed, the petitioner sought regular bail under Section 483 BNSS.

Whether the material, particularly the complainant’s statement, disclosed a prima facie basis to deny bail for the alleged offence under Section 69 BNS

Whether the petitioner should be enlarged on regular bail, having regard to the stage of the investigation, the alleged offence and his personal circumstances

The Court considered Section 69 BNS, which criminalises sexual intercourse with a woman by deceitful means or by making a promise to marry without intending to fulfil it, where the conduct does not amount to rape.

It exercised its regular-bail jurisdiction under Section 483 BNSS.

The Court referred to no precedents; its stated considerations included the chronology of the alleged promise and sexual intercourse, completion of the investigation, the maximum punishment of ten years, and the petitioner’s lack of criminal antecedents.

The Court considered the complainant’s Section 183 BNSS statement material to the chronology: she said that sexual intercourse occurred before the petitioner promised to marry her, although further intercourse allegedly took place afterward.

On that account, the Court noted that the promise to marry was made after the initial sexual intercourse and assessed the alleged conduct against Section 69 BNS.

In deciding bail, it also relied on the completed investigation and filed charge sheet, the petitioner’s lack of criminal antecedents, and the offence’s maximum punishment.