Kerala HC grants Mahakumbh viral girl’s husband transit bail:MP Police barred from arresting him for one month

The Kerala High Court has granted one month of transit bail to the husband of the woman popularly referred to as the “viral girl”, after prima facie accepting that she is an adult. As a result, the Madhya Pradesh Police will not be able to arrest him during this period. The husband can now approach a competent court in Madhya Pradesh and seek anticipatory bail. Justice Kausar Edappagath observed that the woman’s birth certificate records her date of birth as 1 January 2008, making her an adult. In response, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing for the Madhya Pradesh Police, argued that the certificate was forged and that the woman was actually a minor. The judge declined to accept this argument, noting that, apart from the birth certificate, the court had also been presented with the Mahakumbh’s viral girl’s voter identity card and bank passbook, both of which indicated that she was an adult. The court further noted that the woman herself claimed to be an adult and had submitted an affidavit stating that she had married the first petitioner, her husband. Court allows time to seek anticipatory bail While disposing of the transit bail plea, the High Court directed that the husband may apply for anticipatory bail before a competent court in Madhya Pradesh within one month from 3 June. Until that period expires, he cannot be arrested in connection with the case. Couple claims threat to life due to interfaith marriage In their joint petition, the woman and her husband claimed that if they travelled to Madhya Pradesh, they could face the threat of honour killing by extremist elements because they belong to different religions. They also argued that, without protection from arrest, they would be unable to travel safely or contact lawyers in Madhya Pradesh to pursue legal remedies. Government questions validity of temple marriage During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju argued that the woman is Hindu while her husband is Muslim, and therefore their marriage conducted in a temple was not legally valid. He contended that, on this basis, the local marriage registrar had no authority to issue a marriage certificate to the couple. Couple met during film shoot in Kerala According to the petition, the woman met the man during the shooting of a film in Kerala. Their relationship gradually developed, and the couple married in March 2026. The marriage later became controversial after the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) raised objections. The Commission claimed that the woman was 16 years old at the time of the marriage and that forged documents had been used to facilitate the wedding. Following these allegations, Khargone Police registered a case against the husband under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. FIR filed against film director in Kerala On 29 April 2026, the woman lodged an FIR under the POCSO Act against film director Sanoj Mishra and three others. Following the complaint, Ernakulam Central Police in Kerala registered a case and launched an investigation. The woman alleged that Mishra had mistreated and exploited her during the shooting of the film The Diary of Manipur when she was still a minor. She claimed he lured her with promises of acting opportunities. Among those named in the FIR is Kerala-based VHP leader and lawyer Anil Vilayil. The woman accused him of defaming her on social media. The identities of two other accused persons have not yet been disclosed. Director calls allegations a conspiracy Film director Sanoj Mishra has denied all allegations, describing them as part of a well-planned conspiracy. He claimed that he was being targeted for speaking out on issues such as “love jihad”. Mishra further alleged that the actress was persuaded to travel to Kerala and was married using forged documents while she was a minor. He said that after raising concerns about the matter, he himself was falsely implicated in criminal cases. Conflicting birth certificates at centre of dispute The marriage has remained controversial from the beginning. Initially, it was labelled a case of “love jihad”, while the woman’s family maintained that she was a minor at the time of marriage. Investigations reportedly uncovered discrepancies in birth records issued by the Maheshwar Municipal Council. According to medical records, the woman’s date of birth is 30 December 2009. Based on that record, she was 16 years, 2 months and 12 days old when the marriage took place on 11 March 2026. Subsequently, authorities reportedly directed the cancellation of an earlier birth certificate that recorded her date of birth as 1 January 2008. Family alleges she was lured into marriage The woman’s parents have alleged that the man persuaded and influenced her into marrying him. An inquiry by the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes reportedly concluded that she was a minor at the time of marriage. Following that finding, a POCSO case was registered against the husband, who was required to appear before police for questioning. Woman accuses parents of harassment In a statement given to Thampanoor Police Station in Kerala, the woman accused her parents of harassment. She alleged that her family was pressuring her to marry her cousin, whom she regarded as a brother. According to her statement, the man supported her during a period of emotional distress. Their friendship gradually developed into a romantic relationship, after which they married at a temple in Kerala in the presence of local residents.