As per case facts, an FIR was lodged against Raju for allegedly establishing a physical relationship with a woman under the false promise of marriage, persuading her to divorce her ... husband, and later refusing to marry her. The petitioner sought to quash this FIR, arguing false implication and lack of involvement, citing various precedents. The State countered that the FIR prima facie discloses cognizable offenses, and the matter requires trial. The question arose whether the promise to marry was false from its inception, if consent was obtained by deceitful means, and if ingredients of Section 69 BNS were ultimately made out. Finally, the High Court dismissed the petition, determining that the FIR prima facie reveals a cognizable offense under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The Court concluded that meticulously examining the truthfulness of allegations and adjudicating on the nature of consent or the intent behind the promise requires appreciation of evidence during trial, and such an inquiry is beyond the scope of quashing an FIR at this preliminary stage.