New Delhi: The Kerala High Court Wednesday granted protection from arrest for a month to the husband of Monalisa Bhonsle, the necklace-seller whose videos selling rudraksha necklaces at the Maha Kumbh Mela in Prayagraj in January 2025 went viral on social media.
A bench of Justice Kauser Edappagath, granted transit bail to Monalisa’s 26-year-old Muslim husband, Farman, in the kidnapping case initiated against him by the Madhya Pradesh police at the behest of the girl’s father. Farman had married the 18-year-old Monalisa in March when the two were shooting a film in Kerala.
Usually, the objective of such transit anticipatory bail is to protect individuals from arrest while they are travelling so that they can seek regular anticipatory bail in a jurisdiction that is different from their current location.
One of the major points that came up in this case for consideration was Monalisa’s age. Amidst contesting claims surfacing about her age since her marriage to a Muslim man, Monalisa was declared to be a major by the Kerala High Court Wednesday. Although her father had filed a kidnapping case against her husband, and said that his daughter was a minor, Monalisa relied on her birth certificate to show that she was a major, born in 2008.
“The grounds raised by applicant No. 1 (Farman) for an order of transit bail appears to be reasonable to avoid minimum threat to his life and personal liberty in the jurisdiction where the FIR is registered,” the court said while making it clear that Farman cannot be arrested till the expiry of one month.
Advocate-on-Record (AOR) Subhash Chandran who appeared for Monalisa told ThePrint that, “The Kerala HC found a strong case in our favour and therefore granted protection from arrest for a period of one month.”
“We had already filed a petition for the restoration of Monalisa’s birth certificate and will be filing appropriate pleas for anticipatory bail as well for quashing of the FIR,” Chandran told ThePrint minutes after the order was uploaded.
In the present case before the Kerala High Court, Monalisa and her husband, both natives of Madhya Pradesh, and both actors, got their marriage registered under the Kerala Registration of Marriage (Common) Rules, 2008.
The case against Monalisa’s husband
Monalisa told the Kerala HC that initially her father had agreed to the marriage, but later, under pressure from relatives, he changed his mind, and filed a “false complaint” with the Madhya Pradesh police. Based on this complaint, the police registered a case against Farman, alleging that he had kidnapped Monalisa.
The MP police had also invoked Sections 81, 83 and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which refer to offences like cohabitation caused by man deceitfully by inducing belief of lawful marriage, marriage ceremony fraudulently taking place without lawful marriage and kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman for marriage. They also invoked Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act 2006 against him, a section that defines the punishment for an adult for marrying a child.
Monalisa and her husband also alleged that if they went to Madhya Pradesh with their plea, they would be subjected to honour killing by “fundamentalists” for their inter-faith marriage. Since they were not in a position to travel and approach a lawyer in MP, without a protection order from this court against their arrest, they sought transit anticipatory bail before the Kerala HC.
Relying on the Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling in Priya Indoria vs State of Karnataka, the court said that pre-arrest bail can only be granted in cases where crimes are registered outside the territorial jurisdiction.
Taking note of Monalisa’s birth certificate, the court said that she was born in 2008, and thus was a major at the time of the wedding. Rejecting the MP police’s contention that Monalisa had forged her birth certificate, the court noted that Monalisa and all her documents confirmed her being a major.
Monalisa’s case
Monalisa’s lawyer Subhash Chandran also told ThePrint: “Although the Kerala police verified Monalisa’s documents, such as her Aadhar card, PAN card, and voter ID, and confirmed her age as above 18 years, given that she was born on 1 January 2008, the Madhya Pradesh government arbitrarily cancelled her birth certificate,” Chandran told ThePrint.
The Madhya Pradesh police has also lodged an FIR against Monalisa’s husband, alleging that he married a minor. Following this, the Kerala HC also granted protection to the couple, and said that no coercive action must be taken against them.
“Our main grievance is that despite the Kerala HC’s protection order, the Madhya Pradesh government went ahead and cancelled her birth certificate, without giving her an opportunity of hearing,” he told ThePrint.
Subsequently, she and her husband approached the Madhya Pradesh HC, alleging that the state falsified her birth records to show that she was a minor when she married her Muslim husband.
(Edited by Viny Mishra)
Also read: Viral Kumbh face Monalisa moves HC against dad for falsifying birth date after she married a Muslim