Kamal Ghorui
NEW DELHI: Refusing to marry due to a ‘kundali’ (horoscope) mismatch after establishing physical relationship based on an assurance of marriage can attract Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita which criminalises sexual intercourse through deceitful means, the Delhi High Court has said.Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma made the observation while declining bail to a man accused of engaging in physical relations with a woman and subsequently refusing to marry her, citing a mismatch in their birth charts. The judge observed that physical relations were established over a period of time on the basis of the accused’s repeated assurance to the prosecutrix there was no impediment to their marriage, including ‘kundali’ matching, and therefore, at this stage, his conduct would attract the offence under Section 69 of the BNS.The accused, who has been in judicial custody since January 4, sought bail contending that the relationship was consensual and that the two had known each other for eight years.His counsel argued that the offence of rape on the false promise of marriage was not made out and that he should be granted regular bail.In its order dated February 17, the court observed that the prosecutrix had initially filed a complaint in November 2025, which she later withdrew based on an assurance of marriage allegedly given by the accused and his family. However, the accused subsequently refused to marry her, citing a mismatch of ‘kundalis’. The present FIR was lodged in January 2026 for offences under Section 376 (rape) of IPC and Section 69 of BNS. The court opined that the sequence of events showed that it was not a mere case of “relationship turning sour” but of repeated assurances of marriage despite the applicant being aware of the insistence of his family on ‘kundali’-matching.In its order dated February 17, the court observed that the prosecutrix had initially filed a complaint in November 2025, which she later withdrew based on an assurance of marriage allegedly given by the accused and his family. However, the accused subsequently refused to marry her, citing a mismatch of ‘kundalis’. “There can be no quarrel with the proposition that criminal law cannot be invoked merely because a relationship fails or marriage does not materialise. However, the present case, at this stage, stands on a different footing,” the court stated. “The subsequent refusal to marry on the ground of non-matching of kundalis, despite earlier assurances to the contrary, prima facie raises a question as to the nature and genuineness of the promise extended by the applicant. Such conduct, at this stage, would attract the offence under Section 69 of the BNS,” it said. The court dismissed the bail application, saying it was not inclined to give relief on account of the nature of allegations, the material collected during investigation, and the fact that chargesheet in the case was yet to be filed. (With agency inputs)
