Section 69 of BNS: Redundancy and Legal Concerns

Section 69 of BNS: Redundancy and Legal Concerns

Syllabus:

GS-1:

Issues Related to Women

GS-2:

Salient Features of Indian Society

Focus:

Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, criminalizes sexual intercourse based on a false promise of marriage. However, legal experts argue that this provision is redundant, as existing laws under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) already cover such cases, raising concerns about constitutional validity.

Section 69 of BNS: Redundancy and Legal Concerns

Understanding Section 69 of the BNS :

  • Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 introduces a provision to address cases of sexual intercourse based on a false promise of marriage.
  • This provision is presented as a stand-alone offence, unlike anything in the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and has sparked debates regarding its effectiveness and relevance.
  • The issue arises from rape cases based on false promises of marriage, where men are accused of rape despite initial consent in a physical relationship. This has led to concerns about women’s agency and free consent.
  • There was an expectation that the law would be amended to remove such provisions that undermine the agency of women, yet Section 69 was introduced instead.

Key points : Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)

●      Definition of Section 69

○       Criminalizes sexual exploitation through deceitful means, such as false promises of marriage, inducement, or fraud.

○       Offenders can face up to 10 years of imprisonment, a fine, or both.

●      Introduction Purpose

○       Address sexual exploitation cases involving deceitful promises of marriage.

○       Fill legal gaps where earlier cases were dismissed due to challenges in proving intent or deceit.

●      Acts Covered under “Deceitful Means”

○       False promises of marriage, fraud, misrepresentation, inducement, or manipulation for sexual consent.

●      Penalties

○       Offenders can be punished with imprisonment for up to 10 years, a fine, or both, depending on the offense’s gravity.

●      Applicability to Live-in Relationships

○       Applies to live-in relationships where false promises of marriage lead to sexual exploitation.

●      Difference from Earlier Laws

○       Earlier laws lacked clarity, making it difficult to prosecute consensual relationships based on false promises of marriage.

○       Section 69 explicitly criminalizes such behavior.

●      Concerns about Misuse

○       Could be misused in consensual relationships that end in conflict, leading to false accusations and legal burden.

●      Role of Evidence

○       Evidence is crucial in proving intent and deceit, with courts examining all circumstances and communications between parties.

●      Challenges Posed by Section 69

○       Gender Bias: Seen as favoring women, with limited protection for men falsely accused.

○       Vague Terminology: Terms like “deceitful means” and “inducement” may be difficult to define, complicating interpretation.

○       Consensual Relationships: Criminalizing disputes over failed relationships can blur personal disagreements from genuine exploitation.

○       Social Stigma: Filing such cases can damage reputations regardless of the verdict.

○       Overburdening Courts: False or exaggerated claims could overwhelm the legal system.

●      Broader Aim of Section 69

●      Aims to protect individuals from sexual exploitation and promote accountability.

●      Seeks to create a fair legal framework, discouraging deceit while ensuring fairness and trust in relationships.

Court’s Perspective on False Promises of Marriage:

A. Supreme Court’s Interpretation

  • The Supreme Court has narrowed the scope of cases involving false promises of marriage, emphasizing the intention behind the promise.
  • In cases like Anurag Soni v. The State of Chhattisgarh (2019), the Court stated that only if the accused had no intention of fulfilling the promise from the outset can it amount to rape.
  • Unforeseen circumstances might also cause the accused to break their promise, which should not automatically be equated to rape.
  • In Rajnish Singh @ Soni v. State of U.P. (2025), the Court quashed proceedings against the accused after a 15-year consensual sexual relationship was alleged, highlighting that deceit was not involved.
  • Additionally, cases where the woman was already married at the time of the physical relationship were also ruled out, reinforcing the idea that misconception of fact is essential for determining consent.

B. Differentiating Breach of Promise and Rape

  • The courts have also clarified the difference between breach of promise and rape.
  • If the woman knowingly maintains a physical relationship, especially for prolonged periods, it may not automatically lead to accusations of rape, as consent becomes a more significant factor.

Analysis of Section 69 of the BNS:

A. Content of Section 69

  • Section 69 of the BNS criminalizes sexual intercourse based on a false promise of marriage if the promise was made deceitfully with no intent to fulfill it.
  • The section specifies that the punishment can be up to 10 years imprisonment and a fine if the sexual intercourse is not categorized as rape under Section 63 of the BNS or Section 375 of the IPC.
  • The explanation to Section 69 includes deceitful means like false promises for marriage, employment, or promotion.
  • Despite the introduction of Section 69, there were no changes in the definition of rape or consent, which remains governed by the IPC and Section 63 of the BNS.

B. Redundancy of Section 69

  • The core issue with Section 69 lies in its redundancy. Since false promises of marriage already fall under misconception of fact as per Section 28 of the BNS, these cases can be prosecuted under the rape
  • The definition of rape under Section 63 already covers misconception of fact, which includes false promises of marriage.
  • This makes Section 69 redundant, as cases of false promise are already addressed under the general scope of rape defined in the IPC and BNS.
  • The provision does not add new legal clarity and might only create confusion by introducing a lesser offence than rape.

Constitutionality and Legal Concerns:

A. Potential Constitutional Issues

  • The absence of an exception in Section 63 to exclude cases of false promises of marriage makes Section 69 constitutionally problematic.
  • Section 69 might be challenged under Article 14 of the Constitution, which ensures equality before the law and prevents arbitrary legal provisions.
  • Furthermore, the lack of a non-obstante clause means that Section 69 could conflict with existing legal frameworks, including the IPC, leading to legal inconsistencies and interpretational challenges.

B. Practical Issues for Law Enforcement

  • Courts have already been quashing FIRs in cases based on false promises of marriage, citing the precedents set in earlier rulings.
  • It would be prudent for police authorities to conduct a preliminary inquiry before proceeding with cases under Section 69 to ensure that a cognizable offence is involved.
  • This could help reduce unnecessary legal procedures and prevent undue hardship for the accused.

Conclusion: The Need for Legal Clarity and Reform

  • The introduction of Section 69 in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 seems to be a redundant addition, as cases involving false promises of marriage are already covered under the broad definition of rape and misconception of fact.
  • The lack of clarity regarding the relationship between Section 69 and the existing provisions of rape under the IPC could lead to legal ambiguities and constitutional challenges.
  • Instead of adding a new provision, it would be more beneficial to refine existing laws to clearly define consent and the parameters of false promises to avoid overlapping legal frameworks.
  • Given the precedents set by courts, it is clear that many cases of alleged false promises of marriage do not fall within the realm of rape, and these should be handled with greater judicial discretion and preliminary scrutiny.
  • In summary, Section 69 appears unnecessary and may inadvertently complicate the legal landscape, and a comprehensive reform of rape laws is needed to address these issues effectively.

Source: TH

Mains Practice Question:

Critically analyze the introduction of Section 69 in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Discuss its redundancy, potential legal challenges, and the need for reform in handling cases involving false promises of marriage.