NEW DELHI: Refusal to marry, citing horoscope mismatch after establishing physical relationship, does not absolve one from prosecution for sexual intercourse through deceitful means, the Delhi High Court has held.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma made the observation while refusing to grant bail to a man, observing that he established physical relations with the woman over a period of time on the basis of repeated assurance to her that there was no impediment to their marriage, including ‘kundali’ matching. Therefore, at this stage, his conduct would attract the offence under Section 69 (sexual intercourse through deceitful means) of the BNS.
In an order passed on February 17, the judge noted that the first complaint by the woman was lodged in November 2025 but was withdrawn “only on the assurance of marriage allegedly given by the accused and his family,” and there was a subsequent refusal to marry on the ground of non-matching of ‘kundalis’.
The accused had sought bail on the ground that rape on the false pretext of marriage wasn’t made out since the relationship was consensual, and the parties had known each other for eight years. The accused was in judicial custody since January 4.
But the court held the sequence of events showed that it wasn’t a mere case of “relationship turning sour” but of repeated assurances of marriage despite the applicant being aware of the insistence of his family on “kundali” matching.
“There can be no quarrel with the proposition that criminal law cannot be invoked merely because a relationship fails or marriage does not materialise. But the present case, at this stage, stands on a different footing,” the judge said.
The judge said that the subsequent refusal to marry on the ground of non-matching of kundalis, despite earlier assurances to the contrary, “prima facie raises a question as to the nature and genuineness of the promise extended by the applicant.” Such conduct, at this stage, would attract the offence under Section 69 of the BNS, the judge said.
Repeated assurances of marriage
The high court refused to grant bail to a man, saying that he established physical relations with the woman over a period of time on the basis of repeated assurance to her that there was no impediment to their marriage, including ‘kundali’ matching.