Refusing Marriage Over Kundali Mismatch After Physical Relations Is Rape by Deceit: Delhi HC

In a significant ruling with far-reaching implications for cases involving promises of marriage, the Delhi High Court has held that refusing to marry a woman by citing non-matching horoscopes — after previously assuring her that kundalis had matched and establishing a physical relationship on that basis — would constitute sexual intercourse by deceit under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma made the observation on February 17 while denying bail to a man accused in a rape case registered under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 69 of the BNS. The court held that the accused's reversal on the question of horoscope compatibility — after explicitly assuring the woman that their kundalis matched — raised serious doubts about the genuineness of his original promise.

"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," Justice Sharma observed. "Such conduct, at this stage, would attract the offence under Section 69 of the BNS, which specifically deals with cases of sexual relations induced by deceit or false assurance of marriage."

The court added pointedly that if matching horoscopes were truly of such importance to the accused, the matter ought to have been resolved before any physical relationship was established — not used as a retroactive exit from a commitment already made.

The woman alleged that her partner had maintained a long-term relationship with her and established physical relations on repeated assurances of marriage. WhatsApp conversations presented before the court showed the accused explicitly confirming that their horoscopes had matched, with one message reading — "Kal hi shaadi kar rahe hain hum" (we are getting married tomorrow).

The complainant had previously withdrawn an earlier complaint after the accused and his family reassured her of their intention to marry — only for the marriage to be denied once again, this time on the grounds of non-matching kundalis.

Rejecting the bail application, the court concluded that the accused's shifting stance on horoscope compatibility was inconsistent with his prior representations, and that consent obtained through such assurances may well have been secured through false promise — bringing the conduct squarely within the scope of the law.