कर्नाटक हाई कोर्ट ने तय किया: झूठे विवाह वादे से यौन संबंध पर दंडात्मक अपराध में महिलाएँ शामिल नहीं

- Home

- /

- High Courts

- /

- Karnataka High Court

- /

- Offence Of Sexual Intercourse On...

Offence Of Sexual Intercourse On False Promise Of Marriage U/S 69 BNS Doesn't Apply To Women: Karnataka High Court

Amruta Gangajaliwale

8 Oct 2026 10:37 AM IST

The Karnataka High Court has held that the offence under Section 69 BNS—which penalises sexual intercourse by employing deceitful means or false promises of marriage which does not amount to rape—cannot be invoked against a woman.Section 69 states that whoever, by deceitful means or by making promise to marry a woman without any intention of fulfilling the same, and has sexual...

This is a premium content

Available exclusively to

Our subscribers

Subscribe Premium INR 1099+GST

Your support helps us to bring you more content at

an affordable subscription scheme !!!

All payment options available

The Karnataka High Court has held that the offence under Section 69 BNS—which penalises sexual intercourse by employing deceitful means or false promises of marriage which does not amount to rape—cannot be invoked against a woman.

Section 69 states that whoever, by deceitful means or by making promise to marry a woman without any intention of fulfilling the same, and has sexual intercourse with her, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is punishable with a term which can extend to 10 years and shall also be liable to fine.

Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde partially quashed an FIR registered against a woman for the offences under Sections 69, 308 (2) (Extortion), 351(2) (Criminal Intimidation) read with Section 3(5) (Criminal act done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the BNS and under Sections 66E (Violation of Privacy) and 67A (Publishing or transmitting material containing sexually explicit act) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

The woman's husband has also been arrayed as an accused in the FIR.

“Admittedly, the petitioner is a women [sic] and is arrayed as accused No.2 and the offence under Section 69 of the BNS, 2023, cannot be attracted against the petitioner and the allegations in the complaint do not indicate any such act by the petitioner,” the High Court held.

However, the Court noted that allegations against the petitioner regarding transmission of private photographs and videos of the complainant require investigation.

“The Court is of the view that the contentions raised relating to data transfer require investigation. In case, during the course of investigation if it is found that there is no data transfer by the petitioner or with the consent of the petitioner, then there cannot be any charge sheet for the said offence against the petitioner,” the Court observed.

Partly allowing the petition, the High Court quashed the complaint against the petitioner for offence under Section 69 of the BNS while directing the investigation agency to probe and file report regarding the remaining offences.

Background

The criminal petition was filed by a woman seeking to quash an FIR, in which she has been arrayed as Accused No. 2 along with her husband. The complainant alleged that she had a relationship with Accused No. 1 (the petitioner's husband) after both accused represented that their marital life was not cordial.

According to the complaint, Accused No. 1 promised to marry the complainant and subsequently had a physical relationship with her. The accused, allegedly, took several photographs and videos of the complainant and shared them with a third party without the complainant's consent and knowledge. The complainant filed a police complaint after both accused began blackmailing her.

Powered by Nyaya 247 News