Kerala HC: No Deceit If Woman Knows Man Is Married
Court narrows scope of Section 69 BNS in consensual relationships
Awareness of marital status negates claim of fraudulent inducement
By Our Legal Correspondent
New Delhi: June 18, 2026:
Kerala High Court has ruled that when a woman knowingly enters into a relationship with a man who is already married, such conduct cannot be treated as “deceitful means” under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. This judgment clarifies the scope of criminal liability in cases involving consensual relationships where the woman is aware of the man’s marital status.
Case Background
Case Title: Akhil N.R. v. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala High Court, Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan
Issue: Whether a man can be prosecuted under Section 69 BNS for sexual relations with a woman who knew he was married.
Facts:
Woman alleged she was induced into sexual relations by false promises.
Evidence showed she was aware of his existing marriage.
Trial court framed charges under Section 69 BNS (deceitful sexual intercourse).
High Court quashed charges, holding awareness of marriage negates deceit.
Key Legal Principles
1. Section 69 BNS, 2023
Replaces Section 493 IPC (cohabitation caused by deceitful means).
Punishes men who induce women into sexual relations by deceit, leading them to believe they are lawfully married.
Requires fraudulent inducement and false belief of marriage.
2. Consent and Knowledge
Court emphasized that consent given with full knowledge of facts cannot be termed deceitful.
If woman knew man was married, she could not have been misled into believing lawful marriage existed.
3. Distinction from Rape Law
Section 69 BNS is distinct from Section 63 BNS (rape).
Rape involves lack of consent or consent obtained by coercion/misrepresentation.
Here, consent was informed, hence no offence.
4. Judicial Precedents
Supreme Court in Uday v. State of Karnataka (2003) – false promise of marriage may amount to rape if intention was dishonest.
Kerala HC in Pradeep v. State of Kerala (2019) – awareness of marital status negates deceit.
Current ruling aligns with these precedents.
Analytical Insights
Scope Limitation: Court narrows Section 69 BNS to cases where women are genuinely misled into believing marriage exists.
Protection of Autonomy: Recognizes women’s agency in consenting to relationships despite knowledge of marital status.
Avoiding Over-Criminalization: Prevents consensual adult relationships from being criminalized under deceit provisions.
Policy Impact: Reinforces need for clear evidence of fraudulent inducement before invoking criminal liability.
FAQ – Quick Legal Index
Q1: What does Section 69 BNS cover?
It penalizes men who induce women into sexual relations by deceit, making them falsely believe they are lawfully married.
Q2: Can a man be charged if the woman knew he was married?
No. Awareness of marital status negates deceit.
Q3: How is this different from rape law?
Rape involves lack of consent or consent obtained by coercion/misrepresentation. Section 69 BNS requires deceit about marriage.
Q4: What evidence is needed to prove deceit?
Proof that the woman was misled into believing lawful marriage existed, despite no such marriage.
Q5: Does this ruling mean women have no remedy?
Women may still pursue civil remedies (maintenance, damages) but criminal liability under Section 69 BNS does not apply.
Q6: What precedent supports this?
Supreme Court in Uday v. State of Karnataka and Kerala HC in Pradeep v. State of Kerala both held that knowledge of marital status negates deceit.
Q7: What is the broader implication?
It ensures consensual relationships are not criminalized unless fraudulent inducement is proven.
Conclusion
The Kerala High Court’s ruling in Akhil N.R. v. State of Kerala clarifies that deceit under Section 69 BNS requires genuine misrepresentation of marital status. If a woman knowingly enters a relationship with a married man, criminal liability cannot be imposed. This judgment strengthens the principle that consent given with awareness is valid consent and prevents misuse of criminal law in consensual adult relationships.