In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court recently granted bail to a man accused of having sexual relations with a married woman under the alleged false promise of marriage. The judgment was delivered by Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas in XXX v. State of Kerala and Anr. (Bail Appl. No. 7916 of 2025), where the Court examined the applicability of Sections 69 and 84 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
The petitioner, Sayooj S., was arrested on 13 June 2025 in connection with Crime No. 755/2025 registered at Malappuram Police Station. He faced charges under Section 84 BNS (enticing or taking away or detaining a married woman with criminal intent) and Section 69 BNS (sexual intercourse by deceitful means).
Read also:- Jammu & Kashmir High Court Acquits Man in Wife's Murder Case, Cites Contradictions and Investigation Flaws
The prosecution alleged that the accused engaged in sexual intercourse with the complainant, a married woman, on the false assurance of marriage. Additionally, he was said to have threatened to publish her private photographs and videos and to have borrowed ₹2.5 lakhs from her.
However, the Court expressed serious doubts over the application of Section 69 BNS in this case.
“Once the admitted case of the prosecution itself is that the de facto complainant is a married woman, there cannot be sexual intercourse with the promise of marriage,” the Court remarked.
Justice Thomas referred to earlier rulings including Anilkumar v. State of Kerala [2021 (1) KHC 435] and Ranjith v. State of Kerala [2022 (1) KLT 19] to reinforce this position. The Court emphasized that when both parties are aware that one is in a subsisting marriage, a claim of promise to marry cannot legally hold ground.
“If both of the parties are aware about a subsisting marriage, it cannot be alleged that the sexual intercourse between them was with a promise to marry,” the Court reiterated.
The Court also stated that it could not conclusively determine, at this preliminary stage, whether the relationship was consensual. It held that the overall circumstances would need careful evaluation during the trial.
Read also:- Why Supreme Court Issues Notice on Tamil Nadu Plea Against HC Stay on VC Appointment Amendment?
While Section 69 is non-bailable, Section 84 is bailable. Given the nature of the accusations and the fact that Section 84 stood as the primary applicable charge, the Court decided that continued detention was not necessary.
Accordingly, the bail was granted with strict conditions, including:
- Execution of a bond of ₹50,000 with two solvent sureties.
- Cooperation with the investigation and no tampering with evidence.
- No intimidation or contact with the complainant.
- No travel outside India without court permission.
The Court clarified that its observations were solely for the purpose of the bail decision and would not influence the merits of the criminal trial.
Case Title: XXX v. State of Kerala and Anr.
Case No: Bail Appl. No. 7916 of 2025
