No Cheating if Marriage Promise Wasn’t False from Start: HC

Soumyadip Mullick, MP,  2 Dec 2025, Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that a promise of marriage cannot constitute cheating unless it is proven that the person never intended to honor the promise from the very beginning.

Justice Prasenjit Biswas made this 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 other document to substantiate the alleged land transfer, even though it formed the core of the cheating allegation.

Justice Biswas emphasized that the accused’s intention at the time of the promise is the decisive factor, and a later refusal to marry alone cannot prove cheating. In cross-examination, the woman admitted she knew the man was already married when the relationship began. 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 indicated voluntary participation rather than deception.

Witness accounts concerning the alleged land transfer 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. Several statements by the grandmother were made for the first time during the trial and not during the investigation.

The prosecution had alleged that the woman became pregnant and that her family sought marriage. However, the court observed that contradictions in the FIR and witness testimonies weakened the narrative of inducement. It also noted that the man had previously been acquitted of graver charges of rape and cheating by inducement under Sections 376 and 420, further undermining 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.