Prayagraj, Jan. 17 -- The Allahabad high court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against a teacher accused of maintaining a sexual relationship with his student for over a decade under the false promise of marriage. Observing that a promise of marriage by an already married man will prima facie amount to the offence of sexual intercourse by employing deceitful means under section 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), justice Avnish Saxena dismissed a petition filed by the accused, Kuldeep Verma. The court noted that since the accused was already married when he entered into a relationship with the victim, the alleged promise to marry her amounted to 'deceitful means' as defined under Section 69 of the BNS. The petition, filed under section 528 (inherent powers of high court) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), sought the quashing of the entire criminal proceedings against Verma. An FIR was lodged on June 20, 2025, in Aligarh district against the accused, alleging he had sexual intercourse with the victim based on a false promise of marriage. The victim claimed they had been in a relationship since 2014-15 and that he kept her as his wife but consistently refused to formalise the marriage, only solemnising one in an Arya Samaj Temple. She reportedly discovered his true marital status and the fact that he had three children, after lodging the FIR. The accused, seeking the quashing of the charge sheet, argued that the relations were consensual and had continued since 2014. He also contended that the allegation of "false promise of marriage" could not be sustained because the victim herself claimed they were already married at an Arya Samaj Mandir. The court, in its decision dated January 13, noted that the initial sexual relations were established due to the victim's unconsciousness and subsequently on the false promise of marriage. Justice Saxena highlighted the explanation attached to the BNS provision, which states that 'deceitful means' includes "the false promise of employment or promotion, inducement, or marrying after suppressing identity." The court observed that the accused prima facie knew from the beginning that he could not marry the victim, as he was already married, making the promise an impossible and false one. The court also highlighted the aggravated nature of the allegations given the accused's position of authority in the case....