Promise to marry cases involves instances where the prosecutrix alleges that her consent to sex is vitiated since it was given under a belief of the misrepresentation made by the defendant that he would marry her in spite of him having no such intention to do so from the start. This note adds to the discourse surrounding false promise to marry cases by assessing the harms inflicted by such deceptive acts and exploring whether a civil remedy could effectively center women’s agency within this context. The note challenges the prevailing notion that ‘vitiation of consent’ should serve as the litmus test for addressing these cases as this criterion falls short in capturing the nuanced dynamics inherent to such situations and perpetuates harmful stereotypes and outdated norms. Furthermore, a careful analysis of Clause 69 within the proposed Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023, reveals potential shortcomings associated with criminalisation, such as intrusive legal proceedings and the possibility of misuse. The note then looks at the possibility of a civil remedy highlighting certain advantages and disadvantages. The overarching aim remains the elevation of women’s subjectivity in both the perception of such conduct and the ultimate outcomes of these cases.