Breach Of Promise To Marry: - A Comprehensive Analysis Of Its Legal Implications In India And Abroad

INTRODUCTION – 

Breach of promise to marry is a legal issue that falls within the ambit of both civil and criminal law, encompassing complex dimensions related to personal relationships, societal norms, and individual rights. 

In the realm of legal consequences for breach of promise to marry, a fundamental prerequisite is the establishment of a contractual agreement towards marriage, though the absence of formal requirement regarding the contract distinguishes this legal scenario, there is no obligation for the agreement to be in writing, and a specific form of expression is not mandated. The essentiality of enforceability lies in the mutual exchange of promises between the parties involved, where a promise to marry by one individual only becomes legally binding if reciprocated by the other party. Furthermore, these mutual promises need not be explicitly articulated, they must be inferred from the actions and conduct of the individuals involved. 

A crucial element in the determination of a promise to marry is the communication of intention, merely declaring an intention to marry to a third party holds no legal weight unless this declaration is formally communicated to the intended spouse with the requisite authority. Additionally, while simultaneity is not a strict requirement for mutual promises, a reasonable proximity in the timing of these commitments is expected. 

Importantly, the legal framework surrounding a breach of promise to marry is gender-neutral, thereby allowing either party, be it a man or a woman, to pursue legal action in the event of a breach. Contrary to historical norms, modern instances have witnessed successful actions initiated by men, further emphasizing the equality in legal standing for both genders. 

This article explores the prevalent laws in India, the potential link to criminal charges such as rape, the historical context of the topic, relevant judicial precedents, ongoing reforms if any, and comparison with laws in other countries. 

LEGAL PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO BREACH OF PROMISE IN INDIA –

(1)    INDIAN CONTRACT ACT, 1872 – 

Section 73: - this section deals with the consequences of a breach of contract leading to damages. It states that when a contract is broken, the party who suffers the breach is entitled to receive compensation for any loss or damage caused to him that naturally arose in the course of things. 

Section 74: - this section deals with the measure of damages in case of a breach, it further states that the party who suffers the breach is entitled to receive compensation for present as well as future perceived losses. 

(2)    SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 – 

Section 10: - under this section, the affected party can seek specific performance in place of paying compensation or damages as promised before the breach of terms. 

(3)    INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 – 

Section 415: - considers that a man breaking a promise to marry as a false representation, potentially constituting an offense of cheating, implying that the promisor never intended to fulfill his due part of the promise and thus interpreted as an act of cheating per se. 

Section 375: - although not pertaining to breach of promise, after due interpretation by Indian Courts it was deemed to include where consensual relations are later deemed as rape due to false promise to marry have been handled under this section and tantamount to the definition of rape in the pretext of marriage. 

(4)    INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 –

Section 2: - talks about the corroboration of evidence in case of breach of promise, where it is necessary to prove the falsehood of the statement made on behalf of the person making it and the existence of any state of mind or relevant issue which at the time of making such statement was existing. 

 REVALENT LAW IN INDIA – 

In India, the breach of promise to marry is primarily a civil matter governed by the Indian Contract Act of 1872, and a promise to marry is considered a contractual agreement, and failing to fulfill this promise may lead to a civil suit for damages. 

The societal context for women is particularly emphasized, highlighting the societal pressure on women to marry and build a family, the argument contends that a women’s livelihood often is reliant on the marriage, and the failure of an engagement could relatively damage the social position of a woman and could potentially pose a threat to her reputation and eligibility, thus the reciprocal agreement of marriage is viewed as a civil contract, and the gaps in existing laws may leave victims of moral wrongs without adequate legal remedies. 

Moreover, the legal landscape surrounding a breach of promise to marry is complex, and the ability to take legal actions in such cases is not restricted by gender, allowing both men and women to pursue remedies for the broken promise of marriage, and to successfully establish a breach of promise to marry, the legal framework necessitates the existence of a valid marriage contract. Mutual understanding of the intention to enter the marriage relation is essential, and parties are incapable of entering into a contract, or those promising to marry a married person may present a valid defense. 

In the peculiar case of Suman v. Surendra Kumar, AIR 2003 RAJ 155, the Court emphasized that the significance of silence on the part of the husband for more than three years, despite several opportunities is considered a frustrating tactic, thereby rejecting the technical interpretation that both parties must sign the second motion, focusing the substance of consent rather than the format, since silence alone cannot be taken as withdrawal of consent, and the court infers that the husband’s consent for divorce by mutual consent continues. 

Therefore, the HC allowed the appeal, while setting aside the Family Court’s judgement the Court emphasized that the consent of both parties at the second motion stage is crucial, and silence should not be misconstrued as a lack of consent, promoting a fair and equitable approach in matters of breach of promise. 

Usually, the breach occurs when there is a refusal to perform the promise to marry without a legally justifiable reason, and damages may include compensatory damages for injury to feelings, health, reputation, and financial loss. Whilst, a breach of promise to marry has a characteristic of a contractual action it is also considered a wrong against the injured party. 

In the absence of specific legal reliefs for cases arising purely from a breach of promise to marry in Indian law, an aggrieved person can seek compensation or damages under sections 73 and 74 of the Indian Contract Act, and once the existence of a promise to marry is proven, its breach becomes actionable, encompassing both material losses and the tangible aspects of mental and moral sufferings. Notably, fraudulent representations regarding marriage may give rise to both criminal and civil liability. 

Thus, recoverable damages extend beyond financial loss, encompassing compensation for the loss of advantage stemming from the anticipated marital relationship, leaving the injured with very less viable legal remedies due to the personal nature of the obligation imposed upon them. 

CRIMINAL IMPLICATIONS: ALLEGATIONS PERTAINING TO RAPE – 

There have been instances where a breach of promise to marry has been linked to criminal charges, such as rape. However, it is crucial to note that mere breach of promise does not amount to rape under the Indian Penal Code. To establish a rape charge, the prosecution must prove lack of consent and forceful sexual intercourse. 

Likewise, the failure to keep a promise to marry can have a myriad of reasons, ranging from honest changes of mind to more dubious motives. However, from a legal perspective, it introduces the element of false representation and potential criminal liability under the Penal Code, 1860. The breach of promise also holds implications for a woman’s chastity and virginity, which in the eyes of the law is considered a form of property, thus stealing the chastity of a woman is considered an injury to her reputation, and sexual purity is deemed a valuable component of this perceived ‘property.’ 

Breach of promise involves an individual’s right to seek redress against another who has reneged on a promise. While the legal implications of breach of promise are primarily civil, there is an interesting connection with criminal law, hence Sec. 415 of the Indian Penal Code considers a man breaking a promise to marry as a false representation, potentially constituting an offense of cheating. This implies that if the promise-make never intended to marry at the time of making the promise, it could be interpreted as an act of cheating. 

In the case of State of UP v. Naushad, 2013 (16) SCC 651, it was clarified that a breach of promise, by itself, is not sufficient to establish a rape charge. There must be evidence of a lack of consent and force. The Supreme Court further emphasized that the defendant’s intention from the beginning was dishonest as he misled the prosecutrix into believing he would marry her. 

Thus, in a breach of promise case, the defendant may present several defenses, firstly, if the plaintiff made false representations or fraudulently concealed material aspects of their pecuniary circumstances or previous life, the defendant may not be bound by the promise. Additionally, the bad character of the plaintiff can excuse the defendant from fulfilling the contract, unless the defendant was aware of the plaintiff’s character before making the promise. Physical or mental incapacity on the part of the defendant may justify termination of the engagement under certain circumstances. However, mere disease of infirmity may not be sufficient, and supervening insanity, though not automatically voiding the agreement, could serve as a defense.

• Acts under misconception of fact and Conscious acts – 

The courts are tasked with a critical examination of whether a sexual act transpired through the free will and genuine consent of the prosecutrix or it was influenced by a false promise of marriage. Drawing upon guidance provided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Uday v. State of Karnataka, AIR 2003 SC 1639, in this instance the court held that the prosecutrix’s consent was not given under a misconception of fact. It further emphasizes her awareness of the difficulties in their marriage due to caste differences. The court also highlights the lack of evidence proving that the defendant never intended to marry the prosecutrix or knew that her consent was based on a false promise. 

This case highlights the perfect mixture of misconception and understanding between the statements given by the prosecutrix and the Court's assertion that were both unable to decide whether the consent so given was based on a false pretext of marriage. 

In the above-mentioned SC’s decision, the court highlighted the importance of considering the evidence on record in cases of this nature. In a specific instance, the court is thus entrusted with evaluating whether the circumstances surrounding the sexual act reflect voluntary consent or if a false promise of marriage was employed to overcome the prosecutrix’s resistance. In the absence of a false promise, the act may not qualify as rape; However, if such deceit is evidence, it squarely falls within the purview of the offense of rape. 

The need for a meticulous examination of the facts and circumstances becomes paramount in determining the nature of consent and the role of false promises in influencing the prosecutrix’s decisions. 

HISTORICAL CONTEXT AND EMERGENCE OF BREACH OF PROMISE TO MARRY IN INDIA – 

The concept of breach of promise to marry has deep roots in historical notions of honor, morality, and social expectations surrounding marriage. In traditional societies, marriage was often viewed not only as a personal commitment but also as a contractual agreement with societal implications. The breach of a promise to marry was considered a violation of this contract, leading to the emergence of legal implications. 

Historically, Indian society placed immense importance on the institution of marriage, viewing it as a sacred bond with societal and familial implications. The promise to marry was regarded as a solemn commitment, and any breach was seen as a betrayal not only to the individuals but also to their families. The legal system, influenced by these societal norms, recognized and addressed breaches of such promises within the framework of contract law. 

The roots of the breach of promise to marry can be traced back to the development of contract law in India during the colonial period. The Indian Contract Act of 1872 laid down the principles governing contracts, and the promise to marry was implicitly considered a valid contractual agreement. This legal recognition reflected the influence of Victorian morality and British legal traditions prevalent during that era. 

As India underwent social and cultural transformations in the post-independence period, with the increasing awareness of individual rights and changing societal attitudes, legal disputes related to breach of promise legal recourse to address the emotional and reputational harm they believed resulted from the broken promises. 

Over the years, courts in India have grappled with the complexities of breach of promise cases, balancing individual rights with societal expectations. Judicial interpretations have evolved to emphasize the need for genuine intent, clear communication, and the assessment of damages suffered by the aggrieved party. Landmark judgements have played a crucial role in shaping the legal landscape surrounding breach of promise to marry. 

Thus, in the contemporary context, the historical roots of breach of marriage are still visible in legal discussions. Ongoing debates focus on whether the legal framework adequately addresses the changing dynamics of relationships and the potential for misuse of such claims. In essence, the historical context and emergence of the breach of promise to marry in India are intertwined with the evolving dynamics of societal expectations, legal traditions, and changing attitudes towards individual rights and autonomy within the realm of personal relationships. 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS – 

(A)  Kailash Chandra v. Smt. Sugrabai, 1962 SCR (1) 374, this case highlighted the contractual nature under the Indian Contract Act, where the Hon’ble Supreme Court emphasized that a promise to marry constitutes a valid contract and a breach of such promise could lead to a civil suit for damages. The Court set an early precedent for the recognition of the contractual aspect of the promise to marry, establishing the foundation for subsequent judgements. 

(B)  Smt. Suman v. Surendra Kumar, AIR 2003 RAJ 155, in this instance, dealt with the breach of promise to marry and the subsequent impact on the mental and emotional well-being of the aggrieved party, the court emphasized that the need for genuine intent in making a promise to marry and considered the emotional distressed suffered by the aggrieved party as a valid claim for damages. 

(C)  State of UP v. Naushad, AIR 2014 SC 384, this case explored the potential link between breach of promise to marry and criminal charges, such as rape. The court further clarified that breach of promise, by itself, does not amount to rape, the prosecution must establish a lack of consent and force to sustain a rape charge, moreover, this case underscored the distinction between civil and criminal aspects, guiding the element required for a rape charge in the context of a broken promise to marry. 

These case laws collectively contribute to the Judiciary addressing both civil and criminal dimensions while establishing principles for evaluating evidence, and safeguarding the rights of individuals. 

REFORMS AND NEW LAWS ALONG WITH INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE – 

(A)  Reforms and New laws – 

In India, the legal response to a breach of promise to marry has primarily been within the realm of existing tort and contract law, without specific legislative reforms addressing the issue directly. However, ongoing discussions within the legal community have spurred calls for a more nuanced approach to protect the rights of individuals involved in such cases. 

Furthermore, the absence of specific legislation addressing breach of promise to marry has led to a reliance on general contract principles under the ICA,1872, and arguably the current legal framework might not be adequately addressing the complexities of modern relationships, and there is a growing need for specialized legislation or amendments to existing laws. 

The absence of specific legislation does not imply a lack of legal recourse for those affected by a breach of promise, it is just that the Courts have recognized the rights of aggrieved parties to seek compensation for damages, including emotional distress. However, the absence of a dedicated legal framework might hinder the clarity and efficiency of legal processes. 

Additionally, reforms in this context need to consider the evolving social dynamics and attitudes towards relationships and marriage, and laws and legal frameworks should better align with contemporary societal values and expectations. 

(B)   International Perspective with regards to US legal framework on breach of promise to marry – 

In the realm of international perspective on breach of promise to marry, the recognition of such actions can be traced back to the earliest legal developments in the US. The foundational policy supporting this legal avenue was articulated in an 1818 Massachusetts decision, emphasizing the protection of a female plaintiff whose life prospects could be significantly impacted by the deceit of a pledged partner. This sentiment reflects a societal interest in preventing conduct that might consign a virtuous woman to celibacy from becoming widespread. 

Determining what constitutes a promise to marry and the acceptable evidence supporting such claims is an aspect where the case law exhibits certain inadequacies. Courts often accord considerable deference to jury findings on this matter. Some instances even permit the admission of evidence regarding the parties’ sexual relations to establish the engagement. While some U.S. states mandate corroboration, either in writing or through the testimony of disinterested witnesses, the requirement varies. 

Despite the usual classification as an action for breach of contract, there is a discernible trend to treat breach of promise as a tort concerning limitations on actions and damages. Defenses against such actions may involve fraudulent representations or concealment, insanity during the engagement, or the subsequent onset of severe illness or disability. 

Over the four decades, fourteen U.S. states opted to abolish the breach of promise action for various reasons: 

(i)    Excessive use of punitive damages by the juries. 

(ii)    Unfavorable publicity and the likelihood of high damages incentivizing out-of-court settlements. 

The constitutionality of these abolition statutes faced challenges in several states, resulting in varying outcomes. While upheld in states like Alabama, California, Florida, New Jersey, and New York, they were declared unconstitutional in Illinois responded by narrowing the scope of the actions, reducing the limitation period, and prohibiting punitive damages. 

In 1949, Tennessee, possibly in response to Illinois, enacted legislation considering the age and experience of the parties. Missouri limited or excluded punitive damages, and Maryland restricted the action to cases involving pregnancy during the engagement. Notably, in most states that abolished the action, bringing an assault action based on matrimonial fraud is impermissible. 

Some argue that the abolition of breach of promise laws provides legal certainty and reduces the potential for frivolous claims, others caution against undermining the importance of promises made within the context of a romantic relationship. Striking a balance between protecting individual freedom and maintaining legal certainty certainly remains a key consideration in the ongoing global discourse on this matter. 

CONCLUSION – 

Breach of promise to marry remains a complex legal issue in India, involving both civil and criminal dimensions. The legal framework continues to evolve through landmark judgements and discussions surrounding potential reforms. As societal attitudes towards relationships change, it is imperative for the legal system to adapt to meet the needs of contemporary society. 

In summary, the absence of specific legislative reforms in India regarding the breach of promise to marry has sparked discussions within the legal community. Internationally, the trend has been towards abolishing or limiting actions for breach of promise, reflecting a broader acknowledgement of individual autonomy in personal relationships. The debates emphasize the need to balance legal clarity with the evolving dynamics of modern relationships.