Granting bail to man booked in a rape case, the Karnataka High Court observed that when a man who promises marriage subsequently approaches the woman's family seeking approval and where her mother refuses the proposal then it cannot be said that the man had no intention to fulfill the promise.

The single judge bench of Justice S Vishwajith Shetty noted that the victim herself, in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, confirmed that after the alleged sexual act between them, the petitioner had approached the woman's mother and iterated his willingness to marry her daughter. However, the said prospective alliance was allegedly rejected by the mother of the victim.

“…For the purpose of Section 69 of the BNS, 2023, accused should have sexual intercourse with a woman by deceitful means or by making promise to marry the said woman without any intention of fulfilling the same…. From the aforesaid, it is apparent that petitioner, who allegedly had promised to marry the first informant had approached her mother but the proposal was refused by the mother of the first informant… In the present case, having regard to the aforesaid aspects, it cannot be said that petitioner had no intention to marry the first informant”, the court accordingly noted in the order granting bail.

For context, the petitioner- accused was arrested after a crime was registered by Mico Layout Police Station, Bengaluru, for offences U/s 115(2), 351(2), 351(3), 69, 89 and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

The victim- woman had lodged her complaint on May 30, 2026. According to the victim, she got acquainted with the petitioner in 2023. Since December 2024, they were in regular contact over mobile phones. The prosecution version states that soon after the petitioner promised the victim that he would marry her, they went to a tourist destination together where they had sexual intercourse, forming the crux of the crime at hand.

The petition filed before the High Court under Section 483 BNSS sought regular bail after the Sessions Court rejected the petitioner's bail application in July.

Even as admitted by the victim, subsequent to the incident, the petitioner went to the victim's house, met her mother, and informed her that he was ready and willing to marry the victim. However, the mother allegedly refused the proposal.

The court, hence opined that there was no material to suggest the petitioner never intended to marry the victim at this stage.

The High Court noted other factors too, while granting bail, such as the petitioner being in custody from the third week of June, and most of the investigation has already been completed.

Hence, bail was granted upon the condition of furnishing a personal bond of Rs 1 lakh along with two sureties for the like sum, among others.

Case title: X v/s State of Karnataka

Case No: Criminal Petition No.11340/2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 332

Click Here To Read/Download Order