Not Disclosing Prior Marital Status Does Not Prima Facie Constitute "Deceitful Means" U/S. 69 BNS: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court observed that non-disclosure of prior marital status cannot be prima facie stated to be a deceitful means as envisaged under Section 69 B.N.S., 2023.

The Bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed, “The Complainant has alleged that she was deceived as the Applicant has not disclosed that he was a divorcee. The Applicant on the other hand, has also asserted that he got deceived because the Complainant is in her early forties and she never disclosed her age to him…. Likewise, the averments that the Applicant had deceived the Complainant by not disclosing that he was a divorcee, cannot be said to be such a material fact as would have induced the Complainant, to get into the relationship. Prima facie no deceit is made out."

Advocate Bhawna represented the Petitioner, while Advocate Shoaib Haider represented the State.

Case Brief

An Anticipatory bail application was filed by the Applicant who was accused under Section 69/64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The Applicant was a 28 years old divorcee and serving as 7 JAK RIF in the Indian Army. The Applicant met the Complainant, who was in her early forties, through a social media platform in February, 2024. It was contended that the Applicant and the Complainant never met each other in person, until July, 2024, when the Complainant insisted the Applicant meet her during his layover while travelling from Himachal Pradesh to Assam.

Further, it was contended that the Complainant on her own volition made a reservation at a Hotel in New Delhi. However, upon meeting her, the Applicant came to know about the significant age difference between him and the Complainant and he expressed his desire to leave the relationship.

The Applicant contended that he may have expressed a conditional willingness to consider marriage in the future, but only if the circumstances proved favourable. He did not make any false promise of marriage with the intent to establish a physical relationship.

Court’s Observation

The High Court noted that from the averments made in the Complaint itself, it is evident that the parties had got into a consensual relationship.

The Court was of the opinion that the averments that the Applicant had deceived the Complainant by not disclosing that he was a divorcee, cannot be said to be such a material fact as would have induced the Complainant, to get into the relationship.

Further, the Court said, “However, even if it is accepted as has been alleged by the Complainant that she was deceived about the matrimonial status of the Applicant, it cannot be prima facie stated to be a deceitful means for compelling the Complainant to have sexual intercourse, as has been envisaged under Section 69 B.N.S., 2023.”

Accordingly, the Court granted anticipatory bail to the Applicant with certain conditions.

Cause Title: Akshay Thakur V. State (NCT of Delhi) (Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:7764)

Click here to read/download Judgment