False Promise of Marriage under Section 69 BNS: Offence, Punishment, FIR, Investigation and Legal Ingredients

Learn about the offence of false promise of marriage under Section 69 BNS, including punishment, legal ingredients, FIR, police investigation, evidence and court principles.

Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 creates a separate criminal offence where sexual intercourse is alleged to have been obtained by deceitful means, including a false promise of marriage. Unlike the position under the IPC, Parliament has enacted a standalone statutory provision. This article explains the offence, punishment, statutory ingredients, FIR process, police investigation, and how courts examine such allegations.

Introduction

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) introduced a significant change to Indian criminal law by creating a specific statutory offence for sexual intercourse obtained through deceitful means, including a false promise of marriage.

Before the BNS came into force, allegations of this nature were generally examined through judicial interpretation under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), particularly in cases where the prosecution alleged that consent had been obtained under a misconception of fact. Over the years, the Supreme Court developed legal principles to distinguish between a genuine relationship that later failed and a relationship induced by deception from the outset.

With the enactment of Section 69 BNS, Parliament has expressly recognised this form of alleged deception as a separate criminal offence. However, the introduction of Section 69 does not mean that every failed relationship or every broken promise of marriage is a crime. The prosecution must still establish the statutory ingredients of the offence, and the courts continue to examine the facts of each case carefully.

This guide explains the law relating to false promise of marriage under Section 69 BNS, including the statutory provision, punishment, essential ingredients, FIR procedure, police investigation, evidence commonly collected, and the judicial principles that continue to guide courts in deciding these cases.

Quick Summary – False Promise of Marriage under Section 69 BNS

What Does Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Provide?

Section 69 creates a specific offence where a person is alleged to have sexual intercourse with a woman by employing deceitful means or by making a promise to marry without any intention of fulfilling it. The provision also refers to certain other forms of deception specified in the statute.

The creation of this provision reflects a legislative decision to specifically address allegations involving deceptive inducement, rather than leaving such cases entirely to judicial interpretation under the earlier legal framework.

It is important to understand that the statutory language must be read as a whole. Every allegation does not automatically satisfy the requirements of Section 69 merely because a relationship ended or a marriage did not take place.

The courts examine whether the statutory ingredients are established based on the evidence in each individual case.

Punishment for False Promise of Marriage under Section 69 BNS

Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita prescribes a punishment of Imprisonment which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine.

The punishment reflects the legislature’s decision to treat sexual intercourse obtained through specified forms of deceit, including a false promise of marriage, as a serious criminal offence.

However, it is important to understand that the punishment provision does not operate in isolation. Before a court can convict an accused person, the prosecution must prove all the statutory ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt.

Simply proving that:

• a relationship existed,
• the parties had sexual relations, or
• the marriage ultimately did not take place,

does not automatically result in conviction under Section 69.

The prosecution must establish that the case falls within the statutory framework of Section 69.

What Must the Prosecution Prove?

One of the most common misconceptions is that a complaint alone is sufficient to establish the offence.

In reality, every criminal prosecution under Section 69 requires the prosecution to prove the essential ingredients of the offence through legally admissible evidence.

Although every case depends upon its own facts, courts generally examine the following questions:

• Was there a promise of marriage?
• Was the promise allegedly made without any intention of fulfilling it?
• Was sexual intercourse alleged to have taken place because of that promise?
• Is there evidence supporting the allegation?
• Do the surrounding circumstances corroborate the complainant’s version?

These questions form the foundation of every investigation and trial under Section 69 BNS.

Essential Ingredients of the Offence

Understanding the statutory ingredients is critical because every ingredient must be supported by evidence. If one or more essential ingredients are not established, the prosecution may fail.

1. Sexual Intercourse

Section 69 applies only where the allegation relates to sexual intercourse.

A mere promise of marriage, engagement, or romantic relationship, without the conduct contemplated by the provision, does not attract Section 69.

This distinguishes criminal liability under Section 69 from disputes arising solely out of broken engagements or failed relationships.

2. Alleged Deceitful Means

The offence is concerned with allegations that sexual intercourse was obtained by deceitful means, including a false promise of marriage.

The focus of the investigation therefore shifts from the existence of the relationship to the nature of the alleged inducement.

Investigating agencies examine whether the alleged promise was genuinely made with the intention of marriage or whether it was merely a deceptive representation.

3. Promise of Marriage

Not every discussion about marriage amounts to a legally significant promise.

Courts generally distinguish between:

• casual conversations,
• expressions of hope,
• future plans,
• engagement discussions, and
• a definite promise alleged to have influenced the complainant’s decision.

Whether a legally relevant promise existed depends upon the evidence in each case.

4. Intention Behind the Promise

One of the most important factual issues concerns the accused’s intention at the time the promise was allegedly made.

Since intention exists in a person’s mind, it is rarely proved through direct evidence.

Instead, investigators and courts examine surrounding circumstances such as:

• the conduct of the parties,
• communications exchanged during the relationship,
• interactions with family members,
• marriage preparations, if any,
• and subsequent events.

The existence or absence of a genuine intention is ordinarily inferred from the overall factual matrix rather than from a single incident.

5. Causal Connection Between the Promise and the Alleged Consent

The prosecution must also establish the relationship between the alleged promise and the complainant’s decision.

This requires the court to consider questions such as:

• Was the alleged promise the reason for entering the relationship?
• Would the complainant have acted differently in the absence of that promise?
• What do the surrounding facts indicate?

The answers depend entirely upon the evidence produced during investigation and trial.

Related Guide: Essential Ingredients of Section 69 BNS – Explained

Every Broken Promise is Not a Criminal Offence

This is perhaps the most important legal principle for anyone seeking to understand Section 69 BNS.

Relationships may end because of:

• family opposition,
• incompatibility,
• financial difficulties,
• career changes,
• personal differences,
• health issues, or
• other unforeseen circumstances.

The mere fact that marriage ultimately did not take place does not automatically establish that a criminal offence was committed.

Courts repeatedly emphasise that criminal liability cannot be determined solely by the outcome of the relationship. The entire course of conduct, the surrounding circumstances, and the evidence collected during investigation must all be examined before arriving at any conclusion.

This distinction protects two equally important interests:

• ensuring that genuine cases involving deception are investigated in accordance with law; and
• ensuring that every unsuccessful relationship is not automatically treated as a criminal offence.

Why the Facts of Every Case Matter

Unlike many statutory offences, allegations under Section 69 often arise out of long personal relationships.

Two cases may appear similar on the surface but produce entirely different legal outcomes because of differences in:

• chronology,
• communications,
• witness testimony,
• digital evidence,
• family involvement,
• conduct before and after the alleged promise,
• and the credibility of the evidence presented before the court.

For this reason, courts consistently avoid applying rigid formulas. Instead, they evaluate the entire factual matrix before determining whether the statutory requirements have been satisfied.

How is an FIR Registered Under Section 69 BNS?

An FIR (First Information Report) is generally the starting point of a criminal investigation under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. Like other cognizable offences, the police may register an FIR when the information received discloses the commission of a cognizable offence.

However, registration of an FIR is not a finding that the accused is guilty. It merely sets the criminal investigation in motion.

The purpose of an FIR is to enable the investigating agency to collect evidence, examine witnesses, verify the allegations, and determine whether sufficient material exists to prosecute the accused.

Who Can Lodge the Complaint?

Ordinarily, the complaint is lodged by the woman alleging that sexual intercourse took place by deceitful means, including a false promise of marriage.

The complaint is usually recorded by the police under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), after which an FIR may be registered if the allegations disclose the ingredients of a cognizable offence.

The complaint generally contains information regarding:

• the identity of the parties;
• the nature and duration of the relationship;
• the alleged promise of marriage;
• when sexual intercourse first took place;
• subsequent events;
• the circumstances in which the relationship ended; and
• the reasons why the complainant believes the promise was false from the beginning.

The details provided at this stage often form the foundation of the subsequent investigation.

What Happens After Registration of the FIR?

Once the FIR is registered, the investigation begins.

The police do not decide guilt or innocence. Their responsibility is to collect relevant evidence fairly and objectively, whether it supports the prosecution or the defence.

The investigation usually includes:

1. recording statements of witnesses;
2. collecting documentary and electronic evidence;
3. examining the chronology of events;
4. verifying communications exchanged between the parties;
5. obtaining relevant records from service providers or institutions where legally permissible; and
6. deciding whether sufficient evidence exists to submit a charge sheet or a closure report.

Every investigation is fact-specific. The exact steps depend upon the allegations made in the complaint and the evidence available.

Related Guide: Can an FIR under Section 69 BNS Be Quashed?

How Do the Police Investigate False Promise of Marriage Cases?

Unlike offences where physical evidence may be the primary focus, investigations under Section 69 frequently revolve around the history of the relationship.

The investigating officer attempts to reconstruct the relationship from its beginning to its end.

The investigation commonly focuses on the following questions:

• When did the parties first meet?
• When did discussions about marriage begin?
• Was there a definite promise of marriage?
• What was the nature of the relationship?
• When did sexual intercourse allegedly occur?
• What happened afterwards?
• Why did the marriage not take place?
• Does the available evidence support either version?

The answers are derived from the evidence collected during the investigation rather than assumptions or public perception.

Collection of Digital Evidence

Modern investigations rely heavily on electronic evidence.

Where relevant and lawfully obtainable, investigating agencies may examine:

• WhatsApp chats;
• SMS messages;
• emails;
• photographs;
• videos;
• call detail records (CDRs);
• social media communications;
• location records, where legally available;
• hotel booking records;
• travel records;
• online payment records; and
• other electronic documents.

Digital evidence often helps establish the chronology of the relationship and may corroborate or contradict the statements made by either party.

However, electronic evidence is not evaluated in isolation. Courts consider it alongside oral testimony and other documentary evidence.

Recording Statements During Investigation

During the investigation, the police ordinarily record statements of:

• the complainant;
• the accused, where applicable and in accordance with law;
• family members;
• friends;
• colleagues; and
• any other person who may possess relevant information.

The purpose is to understand:

• how the relationship developed;
• whether discussions regarding marriage actually occurred;
• the conduct of both parties throughout the relationship; and
• whether independent evidence supports the allegations.

Where considered necessary under the applicable procedural law, the complainant’s statement may also be recorded before a Magistrate.

Documentary Evidence Commonly Examined

Apart from electronic records, investigators may also examine documentary material such as:

• engagement photographs or invitations;
• travel tickets;
• hotel invoices;
• financial transaction records;
• medical records, where relevant and legally admissible;
• identity documents;
• correspondence between families; and
• any other document relevant to the allegations.

No single document determines the outcome of the case.

Instead, investigators evaluate how each piece of evidence fits into the overall chronology.

Recommend reading: Police Investigation in Section 69 BNS Cases – Explained

The Importance of Chronology

One of the most critical aspects of every Section 69 investigation is chronology.

Investigators attempt to establish a clear timeline covering:

• the beginning of the relationship;
• alleged promises regarding marriage;
• important events during the relationship;
• dates of sexual intercourse, where relevant to the allegations;
• changes in the relationship;
• circumstances leading to its breakdown; and
• the filing of the complaint.

A coherent timeline helps the court understand the sequence of events and assess whether the prosecution’s case is supported by the available evidence.

What Happens After the Investigation?

After completing the investigation, the investigating officer evaluates whether sufficient evidence exists to proceed.

Broadly, two outcomes are possible:

1. Charge Sheet

If the investigating officer concludes that sufficient material exists to prosecute the accused, a charge sheet may be filed before the competent court.

The court then independently examines the material and decides the subsequent stages of the criminal proceedings.

2. Closure Report

If the investigating officer concludes that the available evidence is insufficient to proceed, a closure report may be submitted before the competent Magistrate.

The Magistrate is not bound by the investigating officer’s opinion and will consider the material in accordance with law before passing appropriate orders.

Investigation Must Remain Fair and Impartial

A criminal investigation serves the interests of justice, not merely the interests of one party.

Investigating officers are expected to collect evidence objectively and fairly.

Their duty includes:

• collecting evidence that supports the allegations;
• preserving evidence that may assist the defence;
• avoiding selective investigation; and
• placing the complete factual record before the court.

Ultimately, it is the court—not the investigating officer—that determines whether the prosecution has proved the offence beyond reasonable doubt.

How Do Courts Assess Evidence in Section 69 BNS Cases?

One of the most misunderstood aspects of litigation under Section 69 BNS is the belief that a single piece of evidence—such as a WhatsApp message or the complainant’s allegation—is sufficient to establish guilt.

In reality, criminal courts do not decide these cases on isolated facts. They evaluate the totality of the evidence placed before them. Every piece of evidence is examined in the context of the overall relationship, the chronology of events, and the statutory ingredients of the offence.

The prosecution bears the burden of proving its case beyond reasonable doubt. Equally, the accused is entitled to challenge the prosecution’s evidence through cross-examination, documentary material, electronic records, and other admissible evidence.

The court’s task is not to determine whether the relationship failed. Its task is to determine whether the prosecution has proved the offence alleged under Section 69 BNS.

Recommend reading: Electronic Evidence in Section 69 BNS Cases

Types of Evidence Commonly Considered by Courts

1. Oral Evidence

Oral testimony generally forms the foundation of the prosecution’s case.

The court may consider the testimony of:

• the complainant;
• the accused, where legally permissible;
• family members;
• friends;
• colleagues; and
• any independent witnesses.

The court examines whether the testimony is:

• consistent;
• credible;
• supported by surrounding circumstances; and
• corroborated, where necessary, by other evidence.

Minor inconsistencies do not necessarily render testimony unreliable. However, material contradictions affecting the core allegations may influence the court’s assessment.

2. Electronic Evidence

Electronic evidence frequently plays a significant role in Section 69 prosecutions.

This may include:

• WhatsApp chats;
• emails;
• SMS messages;
• call records;
• photographs;
• videos;
• social media communications; and
• other electronic records.

Courts do not read isolated messages in isolation. Instead, they examine the complete conversation, its timing, and the surrounding circumstances.

For example, communications exchanged over several months or years may assist the court in understanding:

• the nature of the relationship;
• discussions regarding marriage;
• interactions between the parties; and
• subsequent developments.

The evidentiary value of electronic records is assessed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 and other relevant legal requirements.

3. Documentary Evidence

Courts may also examine documentary material, including:

• travel records;
• hotel bookings;
• engagement-related documents;
• financial transactions;
• correspondence between families;
• medical records, where legally relevant; and
• any document supporting or contradicting the allegations.

Again, no single document is determinative. The court evaluates how each document fits within the overall factual matrix.

4. Circumstantial Evidence

Direct evidence of a person’s intention is rarely available.

Consequently, courts frequently rely upon circumstantial evidence to understand:

• the conduct of the parties;
• their interactions over time;
• preparations for marriage, if any;
• involvement of family members;
• and events leading to the breakdown of the relationship.

Circumstantial evidence often assists the court in evaluating the credibility of the competing versions presented by the parties.

Recommend reading: Burden of Proof under Section 69 BNS

Judicial Principles That Continue to Guide Section 69 Cases

Although Section 69 BNS is a new statutory provision, courts continue to draw guidance from well-established principles evolved by the Supreme Court while dealing with allegations involving promises of marriage.

These principles do not replace the statutory language of Section 69. Rather, they assist courts in interpreting factual disputes that arise during investigation and trial.

Some of the important judicial principles are discussed below.

Principle 1: Every Broken Promise Does Not Constitute a Criminal Offence

The Supreme Court has consistently distinguished between:

• a relationship that genuinely failed; and
• allegations that the promise itself was dishonest when made.

A subsequent refusal to marry, by itself, does not automatically establish criminal liability.

Courts therefore examine the entire course of the relationship rather than focusing solely on its eventual outcome.

Principle 2: Each Case Depends Upon Its Own Facts

There is no universal formula for deciding allegations under Section 69.

Two relationships may appear similar but lead to different legal outcomes because of differences in:

• evidence;
• chronology;
• communications;
• conduct of the parties; and
• surrounding circumstances.

This is why courts repeatedly emphasise that every case must be decided on its own facts.

Principle 3: The Entire Relationship Must Be Examined

Courts generally avoid analysing a single conversation or isolated incident.

Instead, they evaluate:

• how the relationship began;
• how it developed;
• interactions between the parties;
• discussions regarding marriage;
• conduct during the relationship; and
• the circumstances in which it ended.

Only after examining the complete factual background does the court determine whether the prosecution has established the statutory requirements.

Principle 4: Criminal Liability Cannot Be Based on Suspicion Alone

Criminal law requires proof based on admissible evidence.

Emotional allegations, assumptions, or public opinion cannot substitute for legal proof.

The prosecution must establish each essential ingredient of the offence through reliable evidence evaluated according to the applicable rules of criminal procedure and evidence.

Related Guide: False Promise to Marry: Supreme Court Principles Explained

Common Misconceptions About Section 69 BNS

Several misconceptions continue to circulate regarding the scope of Section 69.

“Every failed relationship results in criminal liability.”

Incorrect. The failure of a relationship does not automatically satisfy the statutory requirements of Section 69.

“Registration of an FIR means the accused is guilty.”

Incorrect. An FIR merely initiates the criminal investigation.

The court determines guilt or innocence after evaluating the evidence.

“A long relationship automatically defeats the complaint.”

Incorrect. The duration of a relationship is only one factual circumstance.

Its legal significance depends upon the evidence in the particular case.

“WhatsApp chats alone decide the case.”

Incorrect. Electronic evidence is important, but courts examine it together with oral testimony, documentary evidence, chronology, and surrounding circumstances.

Practical Guidance for Litigants

For Complainants

A complainant should preserve all available evidence relevant to the allegations, including electronic communications, documents, and other material that may assist the investigating agency.

The complaint should clearly describe:

• the nature of the relationship;
• the alleged promise;
• relevant events; and
• the reasons for alleging that the offence under Section 69 has been committed.

For Accused Persons

An accused should avoid destroying, deleting, or altering electronic records that may become relevant during investigation.

Legal advice should be obtained promptly.

Documents, communications, travel records, financial records, and other relevant material should be preserved, as these may become important during investigation or trial.

For Investigating Officers

The investigation should remain impartial.

Evidence supporting both the prosecution and the defence should be collected and preserved.

A fair investigation strengthens the integrity of the criminal justice process and assists the court in arriving at a just conclusion.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. Is every false promise of marriage a criminal offence under Section 69 BNS?

No. Section 69 does not criminalise every failed relationship or every broken promise of marriage. The prosecution must establish the statutory ingredients of the offence through admissible evidence. Whether an offence is made out depends upon the facts of each case.

2. Is every refusal to marry punishable?

No. A subsequent refusal to marry does not, by itself, establish criminal liability. Courts examine the entire factual background, including the nature of the relationship, the evidence available, and whether the statutory requirements of Section 69 have been satisfied.

3. Can an FIR be registered under Section 69 BNS?

Yes. If the information given to the police discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, an FIR may be registered. However, registration of an FIR is only the beginning of the criminal process. It does not establish guilt.

4. Can the accused obtain bail?

The availability of bail depends upon the facts of each case, the applicable provisions of law, and the orders passed by the competent court. Factors such as the allegations, the evidence collected during investigation, the stage of the proceedings, and other legally relevant considerations may influence the court’s decision.

5. What evidence is commonly examined in Section 69 cases?

The investigation may involve WhatsApp chats, emails, photographs, videos, call records, travel records, hotel booking records, financial transactions, witness statements, and other documentary or electronic evidence relevant to the allegations. The evidentiary value of each item depends upon its authenticity, admissibility, and its connection with the issues before the court.

6. Is a long relationship enough to prove or disprove the offence?

No. The duration of the relationship is only one factual circumstance. Courts examine the complete factual matrix before arriving at any conclusion.

7. Does pregnancy automatically prove the offence?

No. Pregnancy may be a relevant factual circumstance in a particular case, but it does not automatically establish the commission of an offence under Section 69. The court must still determine whether the statutory ingredients of the offence have been proved.

8. Can WhatsApp chats alone decide the case?

No. Electronic communications are important, but they are considered together with oral testimony, documentary evidence, and the surrounding circumstances. No single piece of evidence ordinarily determines the outcome of a criminal trial.

Key Takeaways

• Section 69 BNS creates a specific statutory offence relating to sexual intercourse alleged to have been obtained through deceitful means, including a false promise of marriage.
• The offence carries a punishment of imprisonment which may extend to ten years and fine.
• Every broken promise of marriage is not a criminal offence.
• Registration of an FIR does not establish guilt.
• The prosecution must prove every statutory ingredient beyond reasonable doubt.
• Courts evaluate the entire factual background, not merely the eventual breakdown of the relationship.
• Electronic evidence, documentary evidence, witness testimony, and chronology frequently play a significant role in these cases.
• Every case is decided on its own facts and evidence.

Conclusion

Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita represents a significant legislative development in Indian criminal law by creating a distinct statutory offence dealing with allegations of sexual intercourse obtained through specified forms of deceit, including a false promise of marriage.

However, the enactment of this provision does not eliminate the need for a careful judicial examination of each case. Criminal liability continues to depend upon whether the prosecution is able to establish the statutory ingredients of the offence through reliable and admissible evidence.

For complainants, the law provides a legal framework to seek investigation where the statutory requirements are alleged to have been satisfied. For accused persons, the criminal justice system continues to recognise the presumption of innocence and the requirement that guilt must be established through due process.

As High Courts begin interpreting Section 69 BNS, the jurisprudence surrounding this provision will continue to evolve. Lawyers, litigants, investigating officers, and courts must therefore remain guided by the statutory language, established principles of criminal law, and future judicial developments.

Ultimately, every allegation under Section 69 BNS must be decided not on public perception or emotion, but on the evidence produced before the court and the application of the law to the facts of the individual case.

Readers who wish to stay updated on developments related to Section 69 BNS, may join our legal awareness community on WhatsApp by clicking here.

The information provided in this article is general in nature and should not be construed as legal advice. If you require further information or legal assistance, you may contact us at section69bns@gmail.com.