Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has held that a promise of marriage cannot amount to cheating unless it is proved that the man never intended to keep that promise from the very beginning.
Justice Prasenjit Biswas made the observation while setting aside a 2017 conviction under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code.
The case involved allegations by a woman and her grandmother that the man induced a relationship by assuring marriage and that the grandmother was persuaded to part with two cottahs of land. The court noted that the prosecution failed to produce any deed, stamp paper, or document to show the alleged land transfer, even though it formed the core of the cheating allegation.
Justice Biswas said the law makes the accused’s intention at the time of the promise the decisive factor, and a later refusal to marry cannot by itself prove cheating.
In cross-examination, the woman admitted she knew the man was already married when she entered into the relationship. She also stated that intimacy occurred several times and that she was aware of the social consequences of a premarital relationship, including the possibility of pregnancy. The court said these admissions showed voluntary participation rather than consent obtained through deception.
Witness accounts surrounding the alleged land transfer also contained major inconsistencies. While the grandmother claimed she had executed a transfer on stamp paper, the investigating officer confirmed that no such document was ever seized, and several of her statements were not made during the investigation but appeared for the first time during the trial.
The prosecution had alleged that the woman became pregnant and that her family sought marriage, but the court observed that contradictions in the FIR and witness testimonies weakened the narrative of inducement. It also noted that the man had earlier been acquitted of the graver charges of rape and cheating by inducement under Sections 376 and 420, which undermined the foundation of the prosecution’s case.
Allowing the appeal, Justice Biswas set aside the conviction, ordered that the appellant be discharged from his bail bond, and directed that the lower court records be sent back.