Okay, let’s be honest. Legal sections don’t usually sound exciting. But 69 Bns is one of those rare provisions that has genuinely got everyone talking, lawyers, students, couples, and honestly, half the internet. If you’ve landed here searching for Section 69 Bns, you probably have a very specific question in mind: what does it actually say, is it bailable, and what happens if someone gets accused under it?
Section 69 BNS (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) criminalises sexual intercourse obtained through deceitful means or a false promise of marriage made without any intention of fulfilling it, where such intercourse does not amount to rape. It is a cognizable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable offence triable by the Court of Session, carrying a maximum punishment of 10 years imprisonment and a fine.
Quick Snapshot: Section 69 BNS at a Glance
Before we go deep into the details, here’s a simple stats table that sums up everything about this provision in one glance.
Quick Reference: Section 69 BNS At a Glance
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Full Name | Sexual intercourse by employing deceitful means, etc. |
| Law | Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 |
| Came Into Force | 1 July 2024 |
| Nature of Offence | Cognizable |
| Bail Status | Non-Bailable |
| Compoundable? | Non-Compoundable |
| Triable By | Court of Session |
| Maximum Punishment | 10 years imprisonment + fine |
| Who Can File | A woman (aggrieved party) |
| Who Can Be Accused | A man |
| IPC Equivalent | New section — closest: IPC Sections 90, 375, 493 |
Keep this table handy. We’ll be unpacking every single row of it in the sections ahead.
What Exactly Is Section 69 BNS?
Let’s start with the basics. Section 69 Bns was introduced when India replaced its 160-year-old Indian Penal Code with the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita on July 1, 2024. This wasn’t just a renaming exercise. Several provisions were rewritten, reorganised, or introduced fresh, and Section 69 falls into that last category.
In simple words, this section deals with a man having sexual intercourse with a woman by using deceitful means, or by promising to marry her without ever intending to keep that promise. Importantly, this kind of act does not amount to rape, and the law is careful to draw that line clearly. Instead, it’s treated as its own separate offence with its own punishment.
What Counts as “Deceitful Means”?
The Explanation to Section 69 BNS defines “deceitful means” to include:
- A false promise of employment or promotion
- Inducement (luring someone with benefits)
- Marrying after suppressing one’s real identity
This means 69 BNS Act is not limited to romantic relationships alone. A false promise of a job or a promotion used to obtain sexual consent can also attract this provision.
Section 69 BNS — Official Text
“Whoever, by deceitful means or making by promise to marry to a woman without any intention of fulfilling the same, and has sexual intercourse with her, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine.”
Is Section 69 BNS Bailable or Not?
Section 69 BNS is not bailable. Section 69 BNS is classified as a non-bailable offence under the First Schedule of the BNS. This means bail is not something the accused can claim as a matter of right. Instead, it has to be argued for and granted by a magistrate or a judge, based on the facts of the case.
It’s also worth knowing that the offence is cognizable. That means the police can register an FIR and make an arrest without needing prior approval from a court. That’s a big deal, because it means the process can move quickly, sometimes even before the accused has had a chance to present their side.
That said, non-bailable doesn’t mean bail is impossible. Anticipatory bail can be applied for if someone believes they might be falsely accused, and regular bail can be sought once an FIR is registered. Courts do grant bail in many such cases, especially where there’s reasonable doubt about whether real deceit was involved from the very beginning.
| Property | Status |
|---|---|
| Cognizable | Yes — police can arrest without a warrant and investigate without prior court permission |
| Non-Bailable | Yes — bail is not available as a matter of right |
| Non-Compoundable | Yes — the case cannot be settled through mutual agreement between the parties |
| Triable By | Court of Session |
Section 69 BNS Punishment: What Does the Law Actually Say?
Section 69 BNS Punishment:
- Maximum: Imprisonment of either description (rigorous or simple) for up to 10 years
- Fine: Mandatory (the accused “shall also be liable to fine”)
- Minimum: Not prescribed — left to the judge’s discretion based on facts
Ten years is a substantial sentence, placing this offence firmly among serious criminal matters, which is why it is non-bailable and tried by the Sessions Court rather than a lower magistrate’s court.
How Does the Punishment Compare to Rape (Section 63 BNS)?
Section 69 BNS explicitly states that the act covered must not amount to rape. This creates a clear separation:
| Aspect | Section 63 BNS (Rape) | Section 69 BNS |
|---|---|---|
| Consent | Absent entirely, or obtained by force/fear | Obtained through specific deception |
| Minimum Sentence | 10 years | None prescribed |
| Maximum Sentence | Life imprisonment / Death | 10 years |
| Standalone Provision | Yes | Yes |
Section 69 BNS Triable by Which Court?
If you’re wondering Section 69 Bns Triable by Which Court, the answer is straightforward. Given the seriousness of the punishment, cases under this section are triable by the Court of Session. This isn’t a matter that gets resolved in a local magistrate’s court. It goes through a proper Sessions trial, which typically takes longer and involves a more detailed process of evidence and arguments.
This classification exists because, generally, offences carrying a punishment beyond seven years and involving cognizable, non-bailable status are considered serious enough to require a Sessions Court’s attention rather than a Magistrate of the First Class.
69 BNS to IPC: What’s the Connection?
Section 69 BNS has no direct equivalent in the old IPC. It is listed as a new provision. However, related cases were previously dealt with under provisions such as Sections 90, 375, 376 and 493 IPC, depending on the circumstances.
In short, 69 BNS introduced a separate offence for sexual intercourse obtained through specified deceitful means, including a false promise of marriage made without the intention to fulfil it.
Here’s a simple side-by-side comparison table to make this easier to understand.
| Old IPC Approach | New BNS Approach |
|---|---|
| Section 90 IPC: Consent under misconception of fact | Section 69 BNS: Directly criminalises deceitful means |
| Section 375/376 IPC: Sometimes applied in false promise cases | Explicitly states such acts do not amount to rape |
| Section 493 IPC: Cohabitation via deceitful belief of marriage | Section 69 BNS: Broader scope, includes job/promotion deceit too |
| No standalone provision | Clear standalone offence with defined punishment |
If you’re researching 69 Bns in Ipc Section comparisons for academic or legal purposes, this table should give you a solid starting point, though we’d always recommend cross-checking with the official Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita text for exact wording.
Section 69 BNS Supreme Court Judgments
1. Kunal Rameshbhai Kalyani v. State of Gujarat (2026)
The Supreme Court held that a broken promise to marry is different from a false promise. Section 69 BNS requires evidence that the accused never intended to marry from the beginning.
2. Rajnish Singh v. State of U.P. (2025)
The Allahabad High Court observed that a long-term consensual relationship does not automatically become a criminal offence simply because the relationship did not result in marriage.
3. Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra (2019)
The Supreme Court held that the promise must have been made with dishonest intent from the beginning for consent to be treated as obtained through deception.
4. Deepak Gulati v. State of Haryana
The Supreme Court stressed that courts should consider the overall circumstances and context of the relationship when examining allegations of deception.
Key takeaway: A relationship ending or a marriage promise remaining unfulfilled does not automatically establish an offence under Section 69 BNS. The initial dishonest intention behind the promise is crucial.
False Promise vs Broken Promise — Why This Distinction Matters
This is the most critical concept in understanding Section 69 BNS:
| False Promise | Broken Promise |
|---|---|
| The intent to deceive existed at the time of making the promise | The promise was genuine when made; circumstances later changed |
| Section 69 BNS may apply | Section 69 BNS does not apply |
| Criminal liability may follow | Civil or personal matter |
| Prosecution can proceed | FIR is likely to be quashed |
Practical Examples
Example 1 — This Could Attract Section 69 BNS:
Ravi tells Priya he will get her a promotion if she agrees to a relationship. He knows from the start that he has no such power or intention. Priya consents based on that false promise. This false inducement regarding employment is explicitly covered in the Explanation to Section 69 BNS.
Example 2 — This Is Unlikely to Attract Section 69 BNS:
Rohit and Sneha were in a genuine two-year relationship. Both intended to marry. Rohit’s family refused to accept the match and he eventually backed out. The relationship ends without marriage. This is a broken promise arising from changed circumstances — not a false promise made with criminal intent from the start. Courts are likely to quash an FIR on these facts.
FIR Process Under Section 69 BNS — Step by Step
Step 1 — Complaint
The woman approaches a police station and files a complaint. Because this falls under sexual offences, her statement is recorded by a female police officer as per standard procedural rules.
Step 2 — FIR Registration
Since Section 69 BNS is cognizable, the police are obligated to register an FIR based on the complaint without prior court permission.
Step 3 — Investigation
Police collect evidence: messages, call records, witness accounts, and any documentation relevant to the nature of the relationship and the promise made.
Step 4 — Arrest / Bail
The accused may be arrested since the offence is cognizable. If someone anticipates being named, they can apply for Anticipatory Bail under BNSS Section 482 before any FIR is filed. After an FIR, regular bail must be argued before the Sessions Court or High Court.
Step 5 — Chargesheet and Trial
If the investigation finds sufficient evidence, a chargesheet is filed and the case proceeds to the Court of Session for trial.
Step 6 — Verdict
The trial proceeds with both sides presenting evidence and arguments. The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the intercourse was obtained through genuine deception — specifically, that the promise of marriage was false from the very beginning.
Section 69 BNS vs Other Related Provisions
| Provision | What It Covers | How It Differs from 69 BNS |
|---|---|---|
| Section 63 BNS (Rape) | Sexual intercourse without valid consent | Section 69 BNS specifically deals with sexual intercourse obtained through specified deceitful means and does not cover acts amounting to rape. |
| Section 70 BNS (Gang Rape) | Rape committed by a group | A separate and more serious offence dealing specifically with gang rape. |
| Section 318 BNS (Cheating) | Cheating and broader deception | Not specifically focused on sexual relationships or consent obtained through deceit. |
| POCSO Act | Sexual offences against children | Applies to minors and follows a separate legal framework. |
| Section 74 BNS | Assault or criminal force against a woman | Deals with assault/criminal force and does not specifically concern sexual intercourse obtained through deceit. |
The Ongoing Debate Around Section 69 BNS
Critics’ concerns:
- The law is gender-specific — only a man can be accused, only a woman can file. This creates a gap in cases of exploitation that go in other directions.
- Being cognizable and non-bailable means an accusation alone can lead to swift arrest, sometimes before the facts are fully examined.
- The terms “deceitful means” and “suppression of identity” could benefit from sharper definitions to ensure consistent interpretation across courts.
- Some legal scholars argue Section 69 is partly redundant because consent obtained through a false promise of marriage arguably already qualifies as rape under Section 63 BNS via the “misconception of fact” route.
Supporters’ arguments:
- Before the BNS, victims of deliberate deception — especially involving false job promises — struggled to find a direct legal route. Section 69 BNS fills that gap clearly.
- Courts have already demonstrated strong judicial guardrails against misuse, as seen in the 2025 and 2026 judgments discussed above.
What to Do If Falsely Accused Under Section 69 BNS
- Consult a qualified criminal lawyer immediately — do not wait for the situation to develop further.
- If no FIR has been filed yet, apply for Anticipatory Bail under BNSS Section 482 before the Sessions Court or High Court.
- Preserve all evidence of the relationship — messages, emails, photos, financial records, anything that reflects the true nature and history of the relationship.
- Do not attempt informal settlements under pressure — in non-compoundable criminal matters, informal agreements can create more legal complications.
- Remember: an FIR is not a conviction. Courts have consistently protected individuals where the evidence does not disclose the required element of deception from the beginning.
Conclusion
69 BNS is a significant provision of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 that specifically addresses sexual intercourse obtained through deceitful means, including certain false promises of marriage or employment. It creates a separate offence with punishment that can extend to 10 years’ imprisonment and fine. There is no direct one-to-one IPC equivalent; related concepts were previously addressed through provisions such as Sections 90, 375 and 493 IPC.
For 69 BNS in IPC comparisons, the key point is that a broken promise to marry is not automatically a false promise. Courts examine whether there was dishonest intent from the beginning. A relationship that simply fails does not by itself establish an offence under Section 69 BNS; the specific facts and evidence of the case remain important.
Read More:
Frequently Asked Questions
Q1. What is Section 69 BNS?
It’s a provision under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, that criminalises sexual intercourse obtained through deceitful means, including a false promise of marriage made without any real intention of fulfilling it.
Q2. Is Section 69 BNS bailable or not?
No, it is a non-bailable offence. Bail must be argued for and granted by a court; it isn’t available as a matter of right.
Q3. What is the punishment under Section 69 BNS?
The punishment can extend up to 10 years of imprisonment, along with a fine.
Q4. Which court tries Section 69 BNS cases?
Given the severity of punishment, these cases are triable by the Court of Session.
Q5. Is there a corresponding section in the old IPC for 69 BNS?
Not directly. Official comparison charts list it as a new section, though it draws on concepts previously found in Sections 90, 375, and 493 of the IPC.
Q6. Can a man get anticipatory bail in a Section 69 BNS case?
Yes, anticipatory bail is a legal option and is commonly pursued by accused persons in such cases.
Q7. Does every failed relationship fall under Section 69 BNS?
No. Courts, including the Supreme Court, have repeatedly clarified that a genuine breakup is different from a deceitful promise made purely to obtain consent.
