Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a writ petition filed before the High Court of Karnataka seeking quashing of an FIR registered under Sections 69 and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner and the second respondent, the complainant, had met in Ireland in 2021 while pursuing their studies. Their friendship evolved into a consensual live-in relationship from December 2022 to June 2024, with sexual intimacy occurring in Ireland. The complainant was already married and had a child, and she had filed for divorce from her husband in May 2022, before the relationship with the petitioner deepened. The divorce was granted in August 2023. In mid-2024, the relationship soured, and the complainant returned to India, registering a complaint on October 19, 2024, alleging that the petitioner had established physical relations on a false promise of marriage. The petitioner lost his job in Ireland due to the complaint and faced difficulties in securing new employment. The core legal issue was whether the breakdown of a consensual live-in relationship, allegedly accompanied by an unfulfilled promise of marriage, ipso facto constitutes an offence under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner argued that the relationship was purely consensual, without any promise of marriage, and that the complainant had moved on with another man. The complainant contended that the sexual relationship was based on a promise of marriage, which the petitioner breached. The State supported the investigation, asserting that the offence was made out. The court analyzed the complaint and found it narrated companionship, cohabitation, and consensual intimacy over two years in Ireland, without coercion or deception at inception. It noted that the complainant had filed for divorce before the relationship with the petitioner blossomed, contradicting the allegation that the petitioner caused the divorce. The court held that for Section 69 to apply, a false promise of marriage must be made with dishonest intention from the beginning, vitiating the relationship by deception. Here, the relationship was consensual, and the subsequent breach of promise did not meet the legal threshold. The court quashed the FIR, ruling that allowing the investigation to continue would be an abuse of process, as no offence was disclosed from the complaint.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Quashing of FIR - Section 69 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Consensual Live-in Relationship - The petitioner sought quashing of an FIR registered under Sections 69 and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, alleging sexual relationship on false promise of marriage. The court examined the complaint and found the relationship was consensual, occurred in Ireland, and the complainant had filed for divorce before the relationship deepened. Held that a mere breach of promise of marriage, without dishonest intention at inception, does not attract Section 69 BNS, and quashed the FIR to prevent abuse of process. (Paras 7-20) B) Criminal Law - False Promise of Marriage - Section 69 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Dishonest Intention - The court considered whether an unfulfilled promise of marriage in a consensual live-in relationship constitutes an offence. It emphasized that for Section 69 to apply, the promise must be false from the beginning, made with a dishonest intention to deceive, and the relationship must be vitiated by such deception. Held that the facts indicated a consensual relationship over two years without initial deception, and the subsequent breakdown did not meet the threshold for criminal liability under Section 69 BNS. (Paras 8-18) C) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India - Quashing of FIR - The petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking quashing of an FIR. The court exercised its inherent powers to prevent abuse of process, noting that allowing the investigation to continue would be an exercise in futility as no offence was made out from the complaint. Held that the FIR was quashed to secure the ends of justice. (Paras 1-3, 20)
Premium Content
The Headnote is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access key legal points
Issue of Consideration: Does the breakdown of a consensual live-in relationship, allegedly accompanied by an unfulfilled promise of marriage, ipso facto constitute an offence under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?
Premium Content
The Issue of Consideration is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access critical case issues
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition and quashed the zero FIR dated 19.10.2024 registered as Crime No. 106/2024 by the Mangalore Women Police Station under Sections 69 and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
