New Delhi, Aug 31 The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a PIL filed by a lawyer seeking enforcement of a Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) provision, which deals with sexual intercourse based on a false promise of marriage.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana termed the PIL filed by lawyer N Sudharsanarao “totally scandalous, frivolous and contemptuous” before trashing it.
While dismissing the PIL, which also sought registration of criminal cases against two SC judges, the bench also told Sudharsanarao to be “cautious” in future before filing such a “scandalous” plea.
The PIL had sought directions for the enforcement of Section 69 of the BNS, 2023, legal recognition and financial protection for women allegedly exploited on the false promise of marriage, and the expunction of certain observations made by the Supreme Court in a recent judgment.
Section 69 of the BNS criminalises sexual intercourse obtained through deceitful means or a false promise to marry.
“Whoever, by deceitful means or by making a promise to marry a woman without any intention of fulfilling the same, and has sexual intercourse with her, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years and shall also be liable to fine,” the section reads.
Besides seeking directions for the strict enforcement of the provision, the plea also sought legal recognition or “wife status” for women allegedly victimised in such circumstances, along with maintenance, financial alimony and compensation to be paid by the accused.
The PIL also challenged certain observations made in a judgment concerning premarital relationships.
The observations referred to in the petition state that authorities must be sensitive to changing times in the context of premarital relationships, noting that such relationships are common and that a consensual physical relationship between two unmarried adults should not, by itself, lead to an adverse assessment of either person's character.
The petitioner sought the removal and expunction of those observations, contending that they could dilute or undermine statutory protection enacted by Parliament in cases involving alleged sexual exploitation on the false promise of marriage.
