‘Mother’s opposition to marriage is not cheating’:SC gives NRI relief in sexual harassment case; man accused of falsely promising marriage

The Supreme Court has granted relief to an NRI man living in Zambia in a sexual relationship case. The court quashed the FIR registered against him. The woman alleged that the man had promised to marry her by December 2024. However, in January 2025, he told her that his mother was not willing to accept the relationship. He then refused to marry her. She claimed that they had stayed at a hotel for two days after their first meeting. In its September 7 order, the Supreme Court said the complaint indicated that the sexual relationship was consensual. It did not state that the man had deceived the woman into agreeing to a sexual relationship. 10-year jail term for sex after false promise of marriage The case is from Vadodara, Gujarat. The FIR was registered under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The provision provides for up to 10 years in prison and a fine for having sexual intercourse through deceit or on the basis of a false promise of marriage. According to the complaint, the woman connected with the man through Facebook in November 2022. They first met in Vadodara in February 2024. The woman alleged that the man took her to a hotel, where they stayed for two days. According to her, he promised to marry her and they had a sexual relationship. Gujarat High Court’s decision The Gujarat High Court had refused to intervene in the case and quash the FIR against the man in May. The High Court said a distinction must be made between a promise to marry made with genuine intentions but which could not later be fulfilled, and a promise made from the beginning without any intention of marrying. The court also said that the man’s mother opposing the marriage could not be considered a ‘genuine and valid reason’. Man’s side The man denied that the relationship was based on a false promise. His lawyer had told the Gujarat High Court that the relationship between the two was consensual. The lawyer also referred to conversations between the man and the woman’s mother and maternal aunt. According to the arguments made before the High Court, the man had sent ₹40,000 to the woman’s mother. He had also sent a mobile phone and clothes worth around ₹32,000 from Mumbai. ​