Allahabad High Court: In a writ petition filed by Royal Challengers Bengaluru (‘RCB’) cricketer Yash Dayal to quash the first information report (‘FIR’) giving rise to case under Section 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’), the division bench of Siddhartha Varma and Anil Kumar, JJ. granted interim protection from arrest to Yash Dayal, till the next date of listing or until submission of the police report, whichever is earlier.
Yash Dayal contended that a person could be accused under Section 69 of the BNS only if it was clearly established that he made a promise to marry without any intention of fulfilling it. He submitted that a bare reading of the FIR revealed that the informant had been in a relationship with him for the past five years and had remained silent throughout that period. It was only after he was selected for the Indian Cricket Team that the informant lodged the present FIR, allegedly with an oblique motive to extort arbitrary and onerous demands. Yash Dayal claimed that he had provided financial support to the informant during their relationship and placed relevant financial records on record. He further stated that no false promise of marriage had ever been made, and the FIR did not disclose that any sexual intercourse had taken place by deceitful means as defined in the Explanation to Section 69 of the BNS, which includes false promises of employment, promotion, inducement, or suppression of identity.
On the other hand, the State argued that the informant had alleged in the FIR that Yash Dayal had persistently exploited her physically over the last five years and had introduced her to his family under the pretext of marriage. The manner in which Yash Dayal involved the informant with his family, according to the prosecution, was sufficient to infer that a false promise of marriage had been made.
The Court, after perusing the contents of the FIR, observed that the relationship between Yash Dayal and the informant had continued for a period of five years. At this preliminary stage, the Court found it difficult to determine whether any promise of marriage had indeed been made, and if so, whether such a promise was false from the very beginning and intended solely to obtain the informant’s consent for sexual relations.
In view of the above, the Court held that the matter required further consideration.
The State accepted notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. Notice was directed to be issued to respondent 3, returnable at an early date.
The Court further directed that the respondents may file their counter affidavit within a period of three weeks. A rejoinder affidavit, if any, could be filed within two weeks thereafter.
The matter was directed to be listed thereafter.
In the meantime, the Court granted interim protection to Yash Dayal and directed that he shall not be arrested either till the next date of listing or till submission of the police report, whichever earlier.
[Yash Dayal v. State of UP, Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.14812 of 2025, decided on 15-07-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
Counsel for Petitioner :- Gaurav Tripathi,Raghuvansh Misra
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
