Married Woman Voluntarily Accompanying Man To Hotel Can't Claim Sexual Relationship Was Induced Solely By Promise Of Marriage: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court recently quashed a criminal case against a man booked under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for having sexual intercourse with a married woman allegedly on the promise of marriage.
Justice Jobin Sebastian observed:
“a married woman who voluntarily accompanies another man to a hotel room and has sexual intercourse with him cannot, merely on the basis of an allegation of a promise of marriage, contend that the sexual relationship was induced solely by such promise, particularly when her subsisting marriage was not in dispute… In the circumstances of the present case, it cannot be said that the consent for the sexual relationship was induced by any false promise to marry the de facto complainant or by any other deceitful means. Consequently, the materials placed on record do not disclose the commission of an offence under Section 69 of the BNS.”
The prosecution allegation was that the accused/petitioner made a false promise to marry the de facto complainant, a married woman, and thereafter, took her to a hotel and had sex with her after mixing some sedatives in her food. It is also alleged that he took nude photos of her and sent them to her on whatsapp. He was alleged to have committed the offences under Section 69 BNS and Section 66E of the Information Technology Act.
While so, the petitioner and de facto complainant amicably settled the disputes. The petitioner sought to quash the FIR and criminal proceedings based on the same. The de facto complainant filed a statement agreeing with the same and the prosecutor also submitted that the disputes have been settled.
The Court noted that the allegations were serious and therefore, cannot be treated as a purely private dispute, which can be settled. It then proceeded to consider the case on merits. It was noted that the complainant was a married woman, who voluntarily accompanied the petitioner to a hotel room and had sexual intercourse.
Since the complainant's marriage was a subsisting one, the Court was of the view that it cannot be alleged that sexual intercourse was induced solely on the promise of marriage. It thus opined that the allegations taken on face value does not make out the ingredients of Section 69 BNS.
Taking note of the settlement, the Court felt that the possibility of successful prosecution was not likely. Thus, it allowed the plea and quashed the criminal proceedings.
Case No: Crl.MC No. 4354 of 2026
Case Title: Habibur Rahman v. State of Kerala and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 489
Counsel for the petitioner: Mithun P., Afsal Khan H., Merin Thomas
Counsel for the respondents: Megha K. Xavier – Senior Public Prosecutor