Men who deceitfully break off promises of marriage after having sex with a woman could face up to 10 years in prison, as Indian law grapples with a widespread but often ignored form of sexual abuse. <\/p>\n
But the new law has also provoked questions about how it will be applied, whether it can effectively protect women from sexual exploitation and whether it risks criminalizing break-ups. <\/p>\n
Prime Minister Narendra Modi\u2019s government introduced a new criminal code in early July, replacing India\u2019s 164-year-old colonial-era penal code. <\/p>\n
Section 69 of the new statute criminalizes having sex with a woman \u201cby making a promise to marry (her) without any intention of\u201d doing so, or by \u201cdeceitful means\u201d such as falsely promising career advancement or marrying under a fake identity. <\/p>\n
The crime is punishable by up to 10 years\u2019 imprisonment and a fine. <\/p>\n
Though the law is new, the concept is not \u2013 many women have previously brought such cases to court, accusing men of luring them into sexual relationships by dangling promises of marriage. <\/p>\n
Indian society has generally conservative attitudes towards sex, with a strong emphasis on female virginity and often pricy dowry negotiations attached to unions. Premarital and extramarital sex therefore remain taboo for many \u2013 and any suggestion of impropriety may make it more difficult for a woman to secure a marriage. <\/p>\n
Audrey Dmello, director of Majlis Law, a women\u2019s rights NGO in India, supports the new law. She argues \u201cpromise to marry\u201d rape cases are under-reported and needed to be tackled through legislation. <\/p>\n
Under the old penal code, courts have previously ruled that having sex under false pretenses is not consensual, giving rise to rape convictions. <\/p>\n
But judges have issued conflicting rulings on \u201cpromise to marriage\u201d cases, something the new law is trying to address. <\/p>\n
In 2019, the Supreme Court heard a case where the plaintiff alleged rape after having been in a long-term romantic and sexual relationship with the defendant, who later expressed reservations about getting married due to caste differences, as detailed in court documents. <\/p>\n
India\u2019s caste system was officially abolished in 1950, but the 2,000-year-old social hierarchy still exists in many aspects of life. The caste system categorizes Hindus at birth, defining their place in society, what jobs they can do and who they can marry. <\/p>\n
The man in the 2019 case was acquitted, with the court ruling that a broken promise was different to a false promise of marriage: the man had to have made the promise with no intention of fulfilling it from the start. Since the woman continued the relationship even knowing there were obstacles to them getting married, it didn\u2019t count as rape, the court ruled. <\/p>\n
However, in the same year India\u2019s top court gave a different ruling in a similar case. It upheld the rape conviction by a doctor in the central state of Chhattisgarh because he had a sexual relationship with a woman after he\u2019d promised to marry her, but then broke his promise and married someone else, according to court documents. <\/p>\n
He was sentenced to 10 years\u2019 imprisonment and a fine of 50,000 rupees (about $600). <\/p>\n
These different rulings show \u201ceven the judges are confused,\u201d said Tanvir Siddiki, a legal advocate based in Varanasi. <\/p>\n
\u201cYou can see that the (one court) is saying one thing, and the Supreme Court of India is saying another thing on the very issue of \u2018promise of marriage,\u2019\u201d he added. <\/p>\n
The new law distinguishes \u201cpromise to marry\u201d cases from rape \u2013 but some lawyers say the parameters are still vague. <\/p>\n
Some have questioned how the law will be implemented, arguing that it will be difficult to prove deceit and the intention to marry in court. <\/p>\n
\u201cHow can one prove a person\u2019s intention? In the real world, even if such a situation occurs the accused would only tell his true intentions to his confidant, he wouldn\u2019t tell the victim that,\u201d said Gopal Krishna, a legal advocate in Varanasi and a legal coordinator for a local NGO for women, Guria India. <\/p>\n
Siddiki added that under the previous penal code, rape victims \u2013 including those in \u201cpromise to marriage\u201d cases \u2013 were required to undergo medical exams, which are no longer required under the new class of case. <\/p>\n
\u201cWithout this, how will the prosecution then prove that the victim was sexually exploited?\u201d he said. <\/p>\n
Some younger Indians have voiced skepticism over the law\u2019s relevance in today\u2019s increasingly progressive India where traditions of arranged marriages and historic conservative attitudes towards dating and pre-marital sex are shifting, especially in more urban and middle-class communities. <\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019re living in a time where people are becoming modern and are choosing to stay in relationships without wanting to get married,\u201d said Durjoy Biswas, a 21-year-old resident of Kolkata in West Bengal state. <\/p>\n
And 19-year-old Delhi resident Vanshika Bhattad questioned what role the law should play when it comes to sex among two consenting adults. <\/p>\n
\u201cEven if the guy is lying about marriage, having sexual intercourse is the consent of both parties, the emphasis should be on consent. If someone forcefully has sex with a girl then it is rape,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n
But while many social media users have voiced fear over the potential abuse of Section 69 against men, Dmello of Majlis Law argued that the law empowers women and places them on equal footing with men. <\/p>\n
\u201cIn our society, we always tell women to do this and that \u2013 do not go out at night, do not wear such clothes,\u201d she said. \u201cThe tables have turned now.\u201d <\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Men who deceitfully break off promises of marriage after having sex with a woman could…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":6529,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6528","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-world"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailywashingtoninsider.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6528","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailywashingtoninsider.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailywashingtoninsider.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailywashingtoninsider.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailywashingtoninsider.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6528"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/dailywashingtoninsider.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6528\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailywashingtoninsider.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6529"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailywashingtoninsider.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6528"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailywashingtoninsider.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6528"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailywashingtoninsider.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6528"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}