The Allahabad High Court has flagged what it described as a growing pattern of sexual exploitation of women through false promises of marriage, warning that such conduct must be stopped at the very beginning.

The observation came while the court rejected an anticipatory bail plea filed by Prashant Pal, who is accused under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including Section 69, which deals with sexual intercourse by deceit.

Justice Nalin Kumar Srivastava, while refusing relief to the accused, made it clear that the facts of the case did not support a claim of a consensual relationship.

“In the present case, the facts reveal that the accused applicant had a fraudulent intention towards the victim from the very beginning. He had no intention of marrying the victim from the outset,” the court said.

Calling the offence a matter of serious concern, the court noted the wider social impact of such cases.

It rejected the defence argument that the relationship was consensual, observing, “He repeatedly had physical relations with the victim on the false promise of marriage. Exploiting the victim under the pretext of marriage and ultimately refusing to marry her are tendencies that are increasing in society and must be curbed at the outset.”

“This is a serious offence against society, and therefore, the applicant is not entitled to any leniency,” the court added.

The bench also took note of the victim’s position, saying that although she was an adult and aware of the consequences of her actions, she had placed complete trust and faith in the accused.

According to the prosecution, the accused maintained a relationship with the woman for five years, during which he allegedly established physical relations with her on the assurance of marriage and subjected her to physical and mental harassment.

Despite the long relationship, he later refused to marry her and got engaged to another woman.

Following this, the accused approached the high court seeking protection from arrest. The state opposed the plea, arguing that the sexual relationship was sustained for years on a false promise of marriage.

The prosecution also submitted that the medical examination supported the victim’s allegations of sexual assault and that the accused had threatened her using obscene videos.

Taking these factors into account, the court refused to grant anticipatory bail, reiterating that such conduct could not be treated lightly and required a firm judicial response.