The Delhi High Court has observed that refusing to marry a woman on the ground of mismatched horoscopes after previously assuring marriage and engaging in a physical relationship could amount to sexual intercourse obtained through deceit or a false promise of marriage. The court made the observation while denying bail to a man accused in a rape case, reported Hindustan Times.
Court's observation in bail hearing
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma made the remarks on February 17 while hearing a bail plea in a case registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), according to Bar and Bench.
Also Read | No automatic bail for juveniles in heinous crimes, says Chhattisgarh High Court
"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, which specifically deals with cases of sexual relations induced by deceit or false assurance of marriage," Justice Sharma said adding that such conduct brings into doubt the nature and genuineness of the promises made by the man.
Allegations in the case
The complainant alleges that she was in a long-term relationship with the accused, who repeatedly promised her that they would marry. Relying on these promises, she alleges that they had physical relations on several occasions.
Justice Sharma highlighted that the accused had earlier told the woman that they had a matching horoscope and that nothing was stopping them from getting married. Court documents, including WhatsApp messages referred to in the case, reportedly show the accused writing, "Kal hi shaadi kar rahe hain hum (we are getting married tomorrow)."
The woman had also alleged that she withdrew her earlier complaint when the accused and his family gave her a assurance about the marriage. However, the plan was later abandoned due to non-matching kundalis.
Also Read | Supreme Court to hear Meta, WhatsApp pleas against Rs 213 crore CCI fine on Monday
Court questions change in stand
The High Court observed that the accused's later refusal appeared inconsistent with his earlier representations. Justice Sharma noted that if horoscope compatibility was crucial, the matter should have been clarified before entering into a physical relationship.
Rejecting the bail plea, the court held that refusing marriage on grounds previously claimed to have been resolved raised concerns that consent may have been obtained through false assurance, bringing the case within the scope of relevant legal provisions.
