Delhi High Court has clarified in an important decision that if a person makes physical relations with a woman after promising her marriage and later refuses the marriage on the grounds of not getting the horoscope, then this conduct can fall in the category of criminal offence.
The court said that in such cases it will be seen whether the consent of the woman was obtained on the basis of deception or false promise of marriage.
Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma made this comment while rejecting the bail plea of the accused in the case Jayant Vats vs. State (NCT of Delhi). The accused has been booked under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and section 69 of the Indian Judicial Code (BNS).
According to the court, the material on record indicates that the accused had earlier assured the woman that their horoscopes had matched and there was no hindrance in the marriage.
Court’s sharp comment in Jayant Vats vs State Delhi Case: Why didn’t you see the horoscope in the beginning?
Justice Swarn Kanta Sharma rejected the argument of the accused and raised very logical questions. If horoscope matching was so important, then why was it not used as a basis before having a physical relationship? Raising the issue of horoscope after establishing physical relationship raises serious questions on the intentions of the accused and the veracity of the promise.
The court said that if a person first says that everything is fine and later makes excuses regarding the same issue which he had said was resolved, then it affects ‘consent’. Such consent will be considered as ‘consent obtained by fraud’.
Delhi Metro: Supreme Court spent Rs 45 lakh on changing the name of the metro station! Why did DMRC raise objection in HC?
Citing WhatsApp chats, the court said that the accused had even told the woman that he was getting married tomorrow itself, which sent the message that the marriage was going to happen immediately. However, later the accused refused to marry and argued that he had not received the horoscope. The court considered this to be contrary to the earlier statements and assurances of the accused.
What did the court say in its order?
Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma said, the subsequent refusal of marriage on the basis of non-receipt of horoscope, when earlier assurances to the contrary have been given, prima facie raises questions as to how genuine and honest the promise of marriage was.
The Court further said that if horoscope matching was of decisive importance to the accused, then this issue should have been clarified at the very beginning before physical relations were established. Subsequent refusal to marry on this basis indicates that the woman’s consent was probably obtained through false assurance or deception.
What is Section 69 BNS: What is Section 69 BNS
The court clarified that Section 69 of the BNS specifically deals with cases where physical relations with a woman are created on the basis of fraud or false promise of marriage. At this stage, the conduct of the accused constitutes an offense under this section. The victim also alleged that she had earlier withdrawn her complaint after the assurance of a new marriage received from the accused and his family. But despite this, the accused later refused to marry on the grounds of not getting the horoscope.
Keeping all these facts and circumstances in mind, Delhi High Court rejected the bail plea of the accused. The court held that prima facie this is a case of obtaining consent by fraud, hence there is no basis for granting bail. In this case, senior advocate Sandeep Sharma, along with advocates Kuldeep Chaudhary and Amit Chaudhary, appeared on behalf of the accused. Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Naresh Kumar Chahar appeared in the court on behalf of the state government.
Why is this decision important?
This decision is being considered very important in those cases where physical relations are established with the promise of marriage and later the marriage is refused on the pretext of social or family reasons like not matching the horoscope. The Delhi High Court has clearly indicated that in such cases the law will strictly ensure that the woman’s consent was not obtained through deceit and false promises.