Mere sexual relationship on a promise of marriage does not constitute an offence under Section 493 IPC.

The Appellant was accused of establishing a physical relationship with the victim in June 2004 based on a false promise of marriage, which continued for two years and resulted in the birth of a female child on 07.04.2006

Despite village panchayats, the Appellant failed to marry the victim

Initially charged under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Trial Court acquitted him of rape but convicted him under Section 493 of the IPC, sentencing him to three years of rigorous imprisonment

During trial, the victim (P.W.2) admitted to a consensual relationship and noted she had since compromised with the Appellant and married another man on 19.05.2007

1. Whether the ingredients of Section 493 of the IPC are attracted in a case involving a consensual sexual relationship based on a promise of marriage where no deception of a lawful marriage exists

Section 493 of the IPC, which criminalizes cohabitation caused by a man deceitfully inducing a belief in a woman that she is lawfully married to him

The Court relied on the precedent Ram Chandra Bhagat v. State of Jharkhand (2013) 1 SCC 562, which established that to prove an offense under Section 493, the prosecution must show the accused made a misrepresentation of marriage that caused the woman to believe her status had changed from unmarried to lawfully married, leading to cohabitation

The Court observed that for an offense under Section 493 IPC to be made out, there must be "deceit" regarding the legal status of the marriage

In the present case, the evidence and the victim's testimony (P.W.2) indicated that both parties were aware they were not married; rather, the victim was actively "insisting upon solemnization of marriage" and even convened panchayats to materialize said marriage

The Court reasoned that because the victim did not harbor a "reasonable belief" that she was already lawfully married to the Appellant, their relationship did not meet the statutory requirement of cohabitation induced by the deceit of marriage status

Consequently, the conviction was found to be legally unsustainable

The Court set aside the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 04.04.2008, allowed the appeal, and discharged the Appellant from his bail bonds