Special Correspondent: Arun Sharma, New Delhi

In a strong and far-reaching judgment, the Supreme Court of India has come down heavily on the misuse of criminal law, ruling that a married woman cannot file a rape case against a man on the ground of a “false promise of marriage” if the relationship was consensual.


A Bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan made it unequivocally clear that a promise of marriage is legally void when a woman already has a living spouse, as Indian law does not recognise a second marriage in such circumstances.


Consent Cannot Be Criminalised
Taking a firm stand, the apex court observed:
“A consensual relationship that later turns sour cannot automatically be converted into an allegation of rape.”
The Bench described such cases as “consensual relationships that subsequently deteriorated”, warning against stretching the criminal law beyond its intent.


Key Findings of the Court
The complainant was already married at the time of the alleged relationship
The allegation involved a lawyer accused of physical relations on the promise of marriage
The court held that the woman was not legally eligible to marry
Hence, the promise itself had no legal sanctity and could not be relied upon


Hindu Marriage Act Clearly Applies
Citing Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the court stated:
“The law does not permit a second marriage during the subsistence of the first. Any promise of marriage in such a situation is void ab initio.”
On this basis, the Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings, holding that continuation of the case would amount to abuse of the process of law.


Sharp Warning to Lower Courts
The apex court issued a clear caution:
Distinguish genuine rape cases from consensual relationships
Criminal law must not become a tool for revenge, coercion, or pressure
Judicial scrutiny at the threshold is essential


Legal and Social Impact
Legal experts say the verdict:
Checks the growing trend of false or exaggerated allegations
Clarifies the legal meaning of “promise of marriage”
Draws a firm boundary between consent and crime


The ruling is being widely seen as a landmark precedent that will significantly influence future cases filed on the pretext of marriage promises, reinforcing that criminal law cannot be weaponised to settle personal scores.