Advocate Dhruv Gupta, on the other hand, thinks that Section 69 of the present Bill is just an extension of Section 64 (punishment for rape).
“In the earlier code, there was no separate specific Section punishing cases of sexual intercourse on account of false promises of marriage, and the same used to be made punishable by the dint of Section 375 and Section 90 of IPC,” he points out.
Gupta further highlights that a consent clause was already there in Section 28 of the proposed law, akin to Section 90 of the previous code.
“So if consent is not there as per Section 28, it may amount to rape. But if it’s not the case and consent is taken on the ground of false promise of employment or marriage with mala fides intention, then it will fall in Section 69,” he underscores.
Source: Barandbench
