Common situations

Sexual Offence by Deceit or Abuse of Authority (BNS ss.68 & 69)

Two distinct, less-severe-than-rape offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023: s.68 covers sexual intercourse obtained by abusing a position of authority or a fiduciary relationship, and s.69 covers sexual intercourse obtained through deceitful means, including a false promise of marriage. Both are filed and investigated like any other criminal offence -- through an ordinary police FIR, not a special forum.

Steps

1. Work out which provision may actually apply -- and confirm it isn't rape.
s.68 covers a public servant, hospital/jail staff, or anyone in a fiduciary relationship who abuses that position to induce a woman under their charge or custody into intercourse. s.69 covers deceitful means generally -- including a false promise of marriage, employment, or promotion, or concealing one's identity. Both sections' own text explicitly excludes acts that amount to rape (BNS ss.63/64) -- if the act itself meets the higher threshold for rape, that more serious charge applies instead.
2. File a First Information Report at the police station with jurisdiction over the incident.
Both s.68 and s.69 are cognizable offences -- the police must register an FIR and can arrest the accused without a warrant. There is no separate special forum; this goes through the same ordinary criminal FIR process as any other cognizable offence.
3. A medical examination and statement may be recorded, as in any assault-type case.
Depending on the facts, a medical examination may be sought, and your statement (and any witness statements) will be recorded by the investigating officer as part of the standard investigation process.
4. Bail is not automatic -- both offences are non-bailable.
Because s.68 and s.69 are classified as non-bailable, the accused cannot claim bail as a matter of right and must apply to a Magistrate, Sessions Court, or the High Court, which decides based on the facts of the case.
5. The case is tried exclusively by the Court of Session.
Both offences are triable only by the Court of Session, not a Magistrate's court. For s.68 specifically, the trial is directed to be conducted, as far as practicable, by a court presided over by a woman judge.
6. For a false-promise-of-marriage claim (s.69), courts apply a specific legal test.
Indian courts (developing this test under the predecessor IPC provision, in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra, 2019) require the promise to have been false from the very start -- made in bad faith with no real intention of honouring it -- and to have had a direct bearing on the decision to consent. A promise that was genuine when made, but simply not kept later, does not meet this test.

Good to know

Handled by: Police (FIR and investigation); Court of Session (trial)

Who can use this: A woman who says sexual intercourse was obtained either by someone abusing a position of authority or a fiduciary relationship over her (s.68), or through deceitful means -- including a false promise of marriage, employment, or promotion, or concealment of identity (s.69). As written, these sections protect a woman complainant specifically; they are not gender-neutral provisions.

This does not cover: This is not for rape -- if the act itself amounts to rape (BNS ss.63/64), that is a separate, more serious offence and the same facts would be examined under those provisions instead. It is also not for the ordinary end of a consensual relationship or a broken engagement -- a promise that was genuinely intended when made, but not kept later, is not by itself a criminal false promise under the courts' own test. This route does not decide whether your specific facts meet that test.

Time limit: No statutory limitation period -- both are serious offences that can be reported at any time. Delay in reporting is not a legal bar, though it may be a factor the court weighs when assessing the complaint. (General criminal law principle; no limitation period applies to offences under BNS Chapter V (Sexual Offences))

Cost: Free -- no court fee for filing a criminal complaint; legal aid available through the DLSA

You'll need:

Date(s), place(s), and circumstances of the incident(s)
The nature of the relationship with the accused (employer, doctor, jailor, or a specific promise made)
Any evidence the promise was false from the outset (messages, witnesses, a pre-existing marriage, etc.)
Whether the facts could instead amount to rape
Any prior complaint or FIR already filed on the same facts

Documents that help:

Messages, chats, letters, or call records referencing the promise or the relationship
Any evidence of the accused's true intentions or existing marital status
Medical examination report, if one was done
Copy of the FIR, if already filed
Proof of the accused's official position (for s.68 -- e.g. employment or appointment records)

What happens after: s.68 carries rigorous imprisonment of 5 to 10 years plus a fine. s.69 carries imprisonment up to 10 years plus a fine. Both are non-compoundable -- meaning the case cannot be privately settled or withdrawn simply because both sides agree -- and are triable only by the Court of Session. A conviction or acquittal can be appealed to the High Court under the ordinary criminal appeal process.

Legal remedies available

These are the remedies Indian law provides for this kind of situation -- not a recommendation, and not every remedy will apply to your own facts.

Victim Compensation

District/State Legal Services Authority (DLSA/SLSA)

The NALSA Compensation Scheme for Women Victims/Survivors of Sexual Assault and Other Crimes, 2018 expressly lists offences under sections 65 to 72 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 -- which includes both section 68 and section 69 -- among the sexual-assault offences it covers, entitling an eligible woman victim or her dependants to apply for compensation through the relevant state's own scheme.

Prohibition on Disclosure of Identity

Applies by operation of law; a breach is itself a separate, prosecutable offence

Section 72 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 prohibits any media report or publication from disclosing the name, address, photograph, family details, or any other particulars that could reveal the identity of a victim of an offence under sections 64 to 71 -- which includes both section 68 and section 69. Disclosing such identity without lawful authorisation is itself a separate offence under the same section, punishable with imprisonment and/or a fine.

Closed (In-Camera) Trial

Court of Session

Section 366 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 makes an in-camera trial mandatory, as far as practicable before a woman judge, for an offence under section 68 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Section 69 is genuinely not among the sections this specific mandatory clause lists by number -- so a case confined to section 69 alone does not automatically fall within this particular mandatory provision, though the Court of Session retains its general discretion under section 366(1) to restrict public access in an appropriate case.

Common questions

Is ending a relationship or breaking off an engagement itself a crime?

No. Courts require the promise to have been false and made in bad faith from the very beginning, with no real intention of honouring it, and to have directly caused the decision to consent (Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra, 2019). A promise that was genuine when made, but simply not kept later due to a change of circumstances, does not meet this test.

What is the actual difference between s.68 and s.69?

s.68 is specifically about someone abusing a position of power or trust over you -- a public servant, jail or hospital staff, or someone in a fiduciary relationship. s.69 is broader and covers deceit generally, including a false promise of marriage, employment, or promotion, or hiding one's true identity. Neither requires proving the additional element needed for a rape charge.

Can the case be settled privately once an FIR is filed?

No -- both offences are non-compoundable, so the two sides cannot simply agree to withdraw the case. Only a court can end the case early, through its own quashing power (under the BNSS, successor to CrPC s.482), based on its own assessment of the facts.

Can a man file a complaint under s.68 or s.69?

Not under these specific sections -- as written, s.68 and s.69 refer to a woman complainant specifically. They are not gender-neutral provisions.

Since these are less serious than rape, is bail automatic?

No -- both s.68 and s.69 are classified as non-bailable offences, meaning bail is a matter for a court's discretion, not an automatic right. The accused must apply to a Magistrate, the Sessions Court, or the High Court, and the court decides based on the facts.

Governing law: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (ss.68 and 69)

Source: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, ss.68-69, 72; BNSS, 2023, s.366; Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra, (2019) 9 SCC 608 -- decided under IPC s.375's predecessor language; no Supreme Court ruling applying this exact test to BNS s.69 itself could be confirmed yet.

Aadhrix does not decide which route applies to you. This describes the official process as published — consider an advocate for advice specific to your situation.

Dealing with this yourself?

Track it in your own Aadhrix -- keep the documents, dates, and follow-ups together in one place, free.

Track this in your own Aadhrix

← Back to Aadhrix