Consensual sexual relationship with a married woman on marriage promise warrants bail under Section 69 BNS.

The applicant filed a first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), seeking regular bail following his arrest on November 11, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 43/2025.

The prosecution alleged that between August 10, 2023, and April 21, 2025, the applicant committed sexual intercourse with the complainant under the false pretext of marriage.

The applicant contended that the relationship was consensual, noting that the victim was a married woman with children who had been deserted by her husband.

The applicant further argued that the FIR was lodged only after he refused to marry her, that he has no criminal antecedents, and that the charge-sheet has already been filed.

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS for an offense registered under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), considering the nature of the relationship and the status of the investigation.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which governs the power of the High Court or Sessions Court to grant bail.

Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), which criminalizes sexual intercourse by deceitful means or through a promise to marry without the intention of fulfilling it.

The Court also referenced procedural safeguards under Section 269 of the BNS regarding non-attendance in court.

Section 84 of the BNSS regarding proclamations for absconding persons.

The Court evaluated the application based on the facts and circumstances of the case, the gravity of the allegations, and the period of detention.

It observed from the victim's statement that she was a married woman with children who had entered into a consensual physical relationship with the applicant after being deserted by her husband.

The Court noted that the criminal proceedings were initiated only after the applicant refused to formalize the relationship through marriage.

Highlighting that the applicant had no prior criminal record, the charge-sheet had already been filed, and the trial was expected to be protracted, the Court determined that further detention was not warranted.

The holding was conditioned upon the applicant's undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments, his presence at all trial proceedings under threat of action under Section 269 of the BNS, and compliance with court appearances during key trial stages such as the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS.

The Court clarified that any abuse of bail or failure to appear following a proclamation under Section 84 of the BNSS would lead to proceedings under Section 209 of the BNS.