Can a man be jailed for refusing marriage after a horoscope mismatch – even after a relationship?
Delhi High Court says such refusal may amount to offence if promises were earlier made.
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has ruled that if a man refuses to marry a woman after physical relations, and later cites kundali mismatch as the reason, he can face criminal charges under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The Court denied bail to the accused in this case.
The matter was heard by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. The Court said that when a man gives repeated assurances of marriage and later backs out by giving a different reason, it raises doubt about whether the original promise was genuine.
“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. 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 Bench said.
The case was registered under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 69 of the BNS. The woman alleged that the accused was in a long-term relationship with her and had physical relations on repeated promises of marriage.
During the hearing, the Court examined WhatsApp chats placed on record. These chats allegedly showed that the accused had told the woman that their horoscopes matched and there was no problem in getting married. In one of the messages, he allegedly wrote, “kal hi shaadi kar rahe hain hum (we are getting married tomorrow),” indicating that the marriage was near.
The woman also stated that she had earlier filed a complaint but withdrew it after fresh assurances were given by the accused and his family. Later, the accused refused to marry her, saying that their kundalis did not match.
The Court found this explanation contradictory. It observed that if horoscope matching was so important, the issue should have been settled at the beginning, before entering into a physical relationship.
The Court further noted that when a reason earlier claimed to be resolved is later used to refuse marriage, it suggests that consent for physical relations may have been obtained on false assurances.
On this basis, the Court rejected the bail application.
Explanatory Table – Laws & Sections Involved
| Law / Provision | Purpose of the Provision | How Applied in This Case |
| Section 376, Indian Penal Code, 1860 | Punishes the offence of rape. | FIR registered alleging sexual relations were established on false promise of marriage. |
| Section 69, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 | Criminalises sexual intercourse induced by deceit or false assurance of marriage. | Court held that repeated assurances of marriage followed by refusal citing kundali mismatch prima facie attracts this section. |
| Section 183, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) | Recording of statement before Magistrate. | Prosecutrix’s statement was recorded before JMFC under this section during investigation. |
Case Details
- Case Title: Jayant Vats vs State (NCT of Delhi)
- Case Number: BAIL APPLN. 422/2026
- Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi
- Date of Decision: 17.02.2026
- Bench: Hon’ble Dr. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma
- Neutral Citation: BAIL APPLN. 422/2026, decided on 17.02.2026, High Court of Delhi
Counsels
- For the Petitioner (Accused):
- Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Senior Advocate
- Mr. Kuldeep Choudhary, Advocate
- Mr. Amit Choudhary, Advocate
- For the State: Mr. Naresh Kumar Chahar, APP for the State
- FIR No.: 01/2026
- Police Station: Keshav Puram, Delhi
Key Takeaways
- A long-term consensual relationship can still be converted into a criminal case if marriage does not happen.
- WhatsApp chats and emotional assurances are now being treated as serious legal evidence of intention.
- Horoscope mismatch, even if culturally relevant, may not protect a man if earlier messages suggest otherwise.
- Bail can be denied at an early stage purely on prima facie interpretation of digital conversations.
- The thin line between a failed relationship and a criminal prosecution is becoming increasingly blurred — and men must understand the legal risk before making repeated marriage assurances.
This Could Change Your Case-Get FREE Legal Advice-Click Here!
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the Indian courts and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of “ShoneeKapoor.com” or its affiliates. This article is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content provided is not legal advice, and viewers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Viewer discretion is advised.