Bengaluru: A consensual relationship that turns sour cannot be treated as a false promise of marriage, Karnataka high court has observed, giving relief to a doctor who was in a seven-year friendship with a fellow doctor.The court has quashed criminal proceedings against the doctor under Section 69 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which deals with sexual intercourse by employing deceitful means.Justice M Nagaprasanna, in an Oct 16 order, observed the case is an illustration of abuse and misuse of Section 69, with consensual acts between two people over several years increasingly being projected as offences under the provision.The petitioner and the complainant, medical students from different Mangaluru colleges, were in a relationship from 2017 to 2024. According to a complaint, the marriage did not materialise due to caste differences and the petitioner’s decision to marry another person. The woman approached Mangaluru women police station in 2025, following which a case was registered and a chargesheet filed.Challenging the proceedings, the petitioner contended the relationship, admittedly physical, had never been based on the promise of marriage or through deceitful means. The complainant contested both claims.The court noted that the principal allegation was that the marriage did not take place because of caste discrimination. It pointed out that Section 69 was introduced under BNS on July 1, 2024, by which time the couple had been in a relationship for several years.Referring to Supreme Court judgments in the Pramod Kumar Navaratna and Shailesh Bhai Govindbhai Makhwana cases, the court reiterated that a promise of marriage must have been made without any intention of fulfilling it from the outset to constitute an offence. A consensual relationship that subsequently turns sour does not, by itself, amount to a false promise of marriage.The court concluded that even the admitted allegations did not constitute an offence under the BNS or Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and quashed the proceedings against the petitioner.
