Grant of bail where physical relationship between consenting adults with prior matrimonial experience does not lead to marriage.

The applicant sought regular bail following his arrest on November 3, 2025, for allegedly establishing a physical relationship with the victim under a false promise of marriage

The victim, a 25-year-old widow with a daughter from a previous marriage, alleged that this relationship resulted in her becoming pregnant and giving birth to a male child on November 1, 2025

The applicant subsequently refused to marry her or acknowledge paternity

The applicant contended that the relationship was consensual and voluntary, and that the FIR was a result of the relationship failing to culminate in marriage

The police filed a charge-sheet on December 30, 2025, while DNA reports to establish parentage remained pending

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of the allegations and the consensual nature of the relationship

The Court applied Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), which penalizes sexual intercourse by deceitful means or through a promise to marry without intention to fulfill it

Procedurally, the court exercised its discretion under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) regarding bail

The court also referenced Sections 84, 183, 209, 269, and 351 of the BNSS concerning the recording of statements, appearance of the accused, and trial procedures

The Court balanced the gravity of the allegations—specifically the claim of a false promise of marriage—against the circumstances of the parties

It observed that the victim was an adult (25 years old), educated, and had been married previously, suggesting she was a "consenting party" in a "consensual relationship"

The Court noted that the FIR was lodged only after the relationship failed to materialize into marriage

Furthermore, the Court took into account that the applicant had no prior criminal record, had already been detained since November 3, 2025, and that the charge-sheet had been filed, meaning the trial would likely be protracted

Given the completion of the investigation (save for the DNA report), continued incarceration was deemed unnecessary

The applicant was ordered to be released on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to strict conditions: he must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must attend all court proceedings personally (unless excused), and must comply with requirements during the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS

Default in these conditions grants the trial court liberty to treat the bail as abused and proceed according to law