This is a legally complex category of case that Indian courts encounter with some regularity, typically arising where a relationship — often alleged by the accused to have been consensual — comes to an end, after which a complaint alleging rape is filed. It is important to approach this subject with legal precision rather than generalisation, because every such case turns entirely on its own specific facts, evidence, and the nature of the relationship, and the law neither presumes such complaints to be false nor does it treat the ending of a relationship, by itself, as proof of a genuine offence. What follows is an explanation of the defences legally available to an accused person in such circumstances, based strictly on established provisions and precedent.

The relevant substantive provisions are found under Section 63 and Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). Section 63 defines rape, while Section 69 specifically addresses the offence of sexual intercourse by employing deceitful means, including a false promise of marriage, which corresponds to the interpretive framework previously built up under Section 375 and Section 90 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. A significant body of Supreme Court jurisprudence, including judgments like Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra (2019) and Anurag Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh (2019), has clarified that for a "false promise of marriage" to vitiate consent and constitute rape, it must be established that the promise was false from the very inception, made with no genuine intention of fulfilment, and that the woman's consent was directly induced by this false promise rather than being a case of a consensual relationship that later failed to culminate in marriage for genuine reasons.

This distinction is the cornerstone of the primary defence available in such cases: the defence must establish, through evidence, that the relationship was consensual in nature, that any promise of marriage, if made, was made in good faith at the time, and that the relationship's eventual breakdown occurred due to subsequent circumstances — a change of heart, family opposition, incompatibility, or other genuine reasons — rather than because the promise was fraudulent from the outset. Courts have consistently held that a breach of promise to marry, without proof that the promise was false ab initio, does not automatically convert a consensual relationship into an offence of rape, and the Supreme Court has cautioned against conflating a failed relationship with a criminal act.

Evidence that can support such a defence typically includes text messages, call records, and other correspondence demonstrating the voluntary and affectionate nature of the relationship over its duration; evidence of the couple having spent time together, travelled together, or lived together with the knowledge of family or friends, indicating a consensual and ongoing relationship rather than a coerced encounter; evidence, where available, of genuine steps taken toward marriage, such as introducing families or making wedding-related arrangements, which supports the argument that the promise was made in good faith; and evidence regarding the specific circumstances and timing of the complaint, particularly where a significant delay exists between the end of the relationship and the filing of the complaint, since courts often examine the reasons for such delay carefully, especially where the complaint appears to follow closely after events like the accused's marriage to another person or a financial or property dispute between the parties.

Where the complainant is herself a married woman, additional factual and legal complexity can arise, particularly around the nature of the relationship given her marital status, and the defence may need to address this dimension carefully and sensitively, without making the case solely about her marital status, since Indian law does not treat a woman's marital status, by itself, as bearing on the truth or falsity of a rape allegation. The focus must remain squarely on the specific facts — the nature of consent, the presence or absence of a false promise from inception, and the surrounding evidence — rather than on generalised assumptions about the complainant's character or circumstances, which courts explicitly disfavour and which Section 146 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (previously Section 155(4) of the Indian Evidence Act, now omitted) reflects, by removing the earlier permissibility of attacking a complainant's general character in rape trials.

Procedurally, an accused in such a case should immediately engage experienced criminal defence counsel to assist with securing bail — noting that Section 63 read with Section 64 BNS offences are non-bailable, requiring a formal bail application before the Sessions Court in most cases — and to begin systematically gathering and preserving all evidence relevant to establishing the consensual nature of the relationship at the earliest possible stage, since evidence such as phone records and messages can become difficult to retrieve if not secured promptly. Anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS may also be a relevant protective step if the accused becomes aware of the likelihood of a complaint before an FIR is actually registered.

Given how fact-sensitive and evidentially demanding these cases are, and how much careful legal strategy is required to present the defence properly and respectfully, without minimising the seriousness of genuine sexual offences, it is essential to work with lawyers experienced specifically in this area. You can consult Aapka Legal Advice for a confidential and thorough assessment of the facts of your case and the strength of the defence available to you. Cases of this nature demand particularly skilled advocacy, and the Top Criminal Lawyers in India| Aapka Legal Advice bring the specific experience needed to navigate bail proceedings, evidence gathering, and trial strategy in such matters. The platform's panel of retired judges, including former sessions court judges experienced in trying such cases, is also available to provide insight into how courts typically evaluate the evidence in relationship-based complaints.

In conclusion, where a rape complaint follows the end of a relationship, the law provides a meaningful and well-established defence centred on demonstrating the consensual nature of the relationship and the absence of a false promise made from the very outset, but this defence must be built carefully on documented evidence and presented through experienced counsel, since these cases are decided strictly on their specific facts rather than on generalisations in either direction.