Criminal Law

Section 69 of BNS punishes offenders who obtain sexual intercourse by giving false marriage promises, law treat it as a punishable offence.

Section 69 BNS - False Promises for Sexual Exploitation

Introduction to Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita punishes sexual intercourse obtained through deceitful means involving intentionally false promises misused for sexual exploitation.
This provision addresses situations where individuals deliberately manipulate another person’s consent by promising marriage, employment, promotion, or concealing essential identity information.
The law considers such conduct extremely serious because consent obtained through manipulation or dishonesty cannot qualify as voluntary consensual participation.
The offence under this section recognizes the harmful impact of deception and acknowledges the psychological vulnerability created by fraudulent promises.
Therefore, Section 69 aims to protect individuals from manipulative tactics and ensure accountability for those intentionally misusing trust for sexual gain.

Understanding the Objective Behind Section 69 BNS

The primary objective of Section 69 is preventing sexual exploitation carried out through deceitful assurances lacking any genuine intention of fulfillment.
The legislature recognized that deceptive commitments often pressure victims into unwanted sexual relationships, causing long-term emotional and psychological harm.
By criminalizing deceitful sexual conduct, the law intends to discourage misuse of trust as a tactic for obtaining sexual consent.
This section ensures that individuals understand the seriousness of fraudulent actions that intentionally manipulate consent for intimate activities.
It also strengthens legal protection by categorizing this conduct as a grave offence requiring strict enforcement through established judicial mechanisms.

Key Ingredients Required for Section 69 BNS to Apply

Section 69 requires proof that the accused intentionally offered a false promise solely for obtaining sexual intercourse from the complainant.
Courts examine whether the accused never intended to fulfill the promise allegedly made for securing the victim’s trust.
The prosecution must establish that the complainant agreed to sexual intercourse exclusively because of the deceitful assurance presented.
A genuine promise later failing due to circumstances does not qualify as an offence under this specific statutory provision.
The deception must exist from the beginning, demonstrating deliberate manipulation designed to secure sexual activities through fraudulent inducement.

Deceitful Means Recognized Under Section 69 BNS

Deceitful means include false promises of marriage intentionally made without any real intention of entering a marital relationship.
It also includes false promises of employment wrongfully made to induce sexual compliance under fabricated expectations of professional advancement.
Promises of workplace promotions made solely to secure sexual favors constitute deceitful means under this statutory provision.
Suppressing identity, such as hiding marital status, religion, or essential personal information, also qualifies as deceptive conduct criminalized.
Any misrepresentation intentionally used to manipulate consent for sexual intercourse triggers criminal liability under this comprehensive legal section.

Punishment Prescribed Under Section 69 of the BNS

The punishment for this offence includes imprisonment extending up to ten years along with mandatory financial penalties imposed by courts.
This severe punishment shows the law’s intention to treat sexual exploitation by fraudulent means as a significant criminal wrongdoing.
The non-bailable nature of the offence demonstrates its seriousness and restricts automatic bail privileges for accused individuals.
The cognizable classification empowers police authorities to arrest the accused without requiring a warrant for immediate legal intervention.
The offence being triable by a Court of Session ensures thorough judicial evaluation and strict procedural scrutiny during trial.

Difference Between Section 69 BNS and Section 63 BNS

Section 63 addresses rape involving absence of consent or consent obtained through threats, fear, coercion, or physical force.
Section 69 applies when consent exists but is obtained through fraudulent misrepresentation intentionally designed to manipulate the decision.
This distinction ensures that deceit-based exploitation receives separate recognition even when the act does not constitute rape legally.
Both provisions seek to protect victims from exploitation but address different forms of wrongful interference with sexual autonomy.
Courts evaluate each offence independently because the nature of deceit differs significantly from force or coercive circumstances.

Judicial Approach and Legal Tests Used by Courts

Courts analyze whether the accused intended to deceive the complainant at the time of making the alleged promise.
Judges consider whether the promise was made solely for obtaining sexual intercourse without genuine intention to fulfill obligations.
Courts also examine whether the complainant relied entirely on the deceptive promise when agreeing to sexual activities.
Evidence demonstrating genuine relationship development usually negates criminal liability because deception must exist from the beginning.
Prosecution must establish deliberate fraudulent intention, not merely relationship failure resulting from genuine disagreements or changed circumstances.

Examples Where Section 69 Will Apply

A man promising marriage solely to secure sexual intercourse without intending marital commitment will face prosecution under Section 69.
A superior offering promotion exclusively for obtaining sexual favors without genuine intention of advancement triggers liability under this provision.
A person concealing marital status to initiate sexual relations commits deceptive inducement punishable under this statutory framework.
A person misrepresenting identity deliberately for gaining sexual access through fabricated personal information falls within this offence.
Any intentional fraudulent representation influencing sexual consent establishes criminal responsibility under Section 69 accordingly.

Examples Where Rape on False Marriage Promise Will Not Apply

A genuine relationship where both parties intend marriage but later separate due to circumstances does not attract criminal liability.
A promise made honestly which becomes impossible due to family pressure or unexpected events does not constitute deception.
Sexual relations based on emotional connection rather than reliance on promises do not satisfy statutory requirements under Section 69.
Mutual consensual relationships lacking fraudulent intention fall outside the scope of this legal offence’s application.
Failure to fulfill a genuine promise without deceptive intention does not meet the essential elements of deceitful inducement.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What conduct is criminalized under Section 69 BNS concerning deceitful sexual intercourse?

Section 69 criminalizes sexual intercourse obtained through false promises intentionally made without any genuine intention of fulfillment.

2. Does this section apply only to false promises of marriage?

No, it also applies to false promises of employment, promotions, and concealment of essential identity information.

3. What punishment can courts impose under Section 69 BNS?

Courts may impose imprisonment up to ten years along with a financial fine depending on case circumstances.

4. Is the offence under Section 69 cognizable?

Yes, police can arrest the accused without a warrant because the offence is cognizable.

5. Is Section 69 BNS a non-bailable offence?

Yes, it is non-bailable, meaning bail is not granted automatically by right.

6. Which court tries cases under Section ?

Cases are triable exclusively by a Court of Session due to the seriousness of the offence.

7. Does Section 69 require proving intention to deceive from the beginning?

Yes, intention to deceive must exist at the time of making the false promise.

8. Does every failed relationship fall under False Promise ?

No, only relationships involving deliberate deceit and fraudulent intention qualify.

9. Does consent obtained through lies count as valid consent?

No, consent obtained through deceit is not valid under Section 69.

10. Can identity suppression trigger liability under this Section 69?

Yes, hiding marital status, religion, or essential identity details qualifies as deceitful means.

11. Does this provision apply when both parties willingly engage emotionally?

No, Section 69 applies only when deceit influences the victim’s decision.

12. Can a genuine promise later failing cause criminal liability?

No, genuine promises failing due to circumstances do not create criminal liability.

13. Does Section 69 overlap with Section 63 rape provisions?

No, Section 69 covers deceit-based consent, whereas Section 63 covers absence of consent.

14. Can women file complaints under rape on false marriage promise ?

Yes, victims may report deceitful sexual exploitation to police authorities.

15. Does the law protect victims from workplace exploitation?

Yes, false promises of promotions or employment for sexual gain fall under Section 69.

16. How to deal with false criminal cases under this Section ?

Individual should contact Legal Expert in Criminal Law at the earliest for quashing of FIR by High Court.