The Calcutta High Court’s Jalpaiguri bench ruled on Friday that a consensual physical relationship between two married adults does not constitute a criminal offence, even if the relationship later falls apart, reported TOI.
The court observed that such relationships, when entered into with full knowledge of each other's marital status, cannot be termed as being based on a false promise of marriage.
"Both parties are married and aware of each other's marital status. Then, the consent given under such circumstances shall be deemed consensual rather than coerced or misled by a false promise, as the initial consent for a physical relationship will be perceived to be based on mutual attraction. It is expected that both parties be aware of their respective marital obligations,” said Justice Bibhas Ranjan De.
The case involved a complaint filed by a married woman on September 8, 2024, against a married man with whom she had allegedly been in an extramarital relationship for two years.
The woman claimed the man lured her into an intimate relationship by falsely promising marriage, according to the TOI report.
However, the court found that the complaint failed to establish any “culpable mentality and clandestine motives” on the part of the accused.
Justice De quashed the proceedings, stating that there was no criminal intent apparent in the case.
According to case details accessed by TOI, after the woman’s husband discovered the affair and chose to separate from her, she asked the man to marry her. When he refused, she filed a case under Sections 69 (sexual intercourse by employing deceitful means) and 351(2) (criminal intimidation) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) at the Maynaguri police station.
The court concluded that, in such circumstances, consensual intimacy between two aware, married individuals cannot be retroactively criminalised simply because the relationship did not culminate in marriage.
The court observed that such relationships, when entered into with full knowledge of each other's marital status, cannot be termed as being based on a false promise of marriage.
"Both parties are married and aware of each other's marital status. Then, the consent given under such circumstances shall be deemed consensual rather than coerced or misled by a false promise, as the initial consent for a physical relationship will be perceived to be based on mutual attraction. It is expected that both parties be aware of their respective marital obligations,” said Justice Bibhas Ranjan De.
The case involved a complaint filed by a married woman on September 8, 2024, against a married man with whom she had allegedly been in an extramarital relationship for two years.
The woman claimed the man lured her into an intimate relationship by falsely promising marriage, according to the TOI report.
However, the court found that the complaint failed to establish any “culpable mentality and clandestine motives” on the part of the accused.
Justice De quashed the proceedings, stating that there was no criminal intent apparent in the case.
According to case details accessed by TOI, after the woman’s husband discovered the affair and chose to separate from her, she asked the man to marry her. When he refused, she filed a case under Sections 69 (sexual intercourse by employing deceitful means) and 351(2) (criminal intimidation) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) at the Maynaguri police station.
The court concluded that, in such circumstances, consensual intimacy between two aware, married individuals cannot be retroactively criminalised simply because the relationship did not culminate in marriage.
You may also like
IPL 2025: Pretty disappointed, we batted really badly as a batting unit, says Rahane
Emmerdale favourite's return 'sealed' after 18 years and he 'won't be alone'
Mikel Arteta offers triple injury update with star ruled OUT of Real Madrid clash
Chh'garh: Three-year old 'sexual assualt' victim still critical, Congress forms panel
Easter travel chaos as strikes in popular European countries could disrupt flights
