. The court’s ruling came in response to an appeal filed by a man challenging his conviction for rape of a woman on the pretext of marriage. The high court emphasized the need for concrete evidence to establish that the accused never intended to marry the victim and had made false promises solely to engage in a physical relationship. The judgment highlighted that mere breach of a promise to marry would not amount to rape unless it is proven that the accused had no intention of keeping his promise at the time it was made. The court also underscored the importance of distinguishing between cases where a man fails to marry a woman due to reasons beyond his control and those where he never intended to fulfill his promise from the beginning. This landmark ruling is significant as it clarifies the legal position on cases involving rape under the false pretext of marriage, providing guidance for future cases. The court’s decision aims to ensure that justice is served by requiring clear and compelling evidence to establish the accused’s fraudulent intent. It sets a precedent for similar cases in India, emphasizing the importance of ensuring accountability in relationships and upholding the rights of individuals who may fall victim to such deceitful practices.