MP Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail Of Kumbh Mela Star's Husband In POCSO Case
A Madhya Pradesh Court on Wednesday (July 1) rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by Mohammad Farman, the husband of the viral Kumbh Mela star, observing that the dispute over the wife's date of birth is subject matter of trial and cannot be considered in the husband's anticipatory bail hearing. The Special POCSO Judge Ravi Zarola in his order said:"The documents presented by...
A Madhya Pradesh Court on Wednesday (July 1) rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by Mohammad Farman, the husband of the viral Kumbh Mela star, observing that the dispute over the wife's date of birth is subject matter of trial and cannot be considered in the husband's anticipatory bail hearing.
The Special POCSO Judge Ravi Zarola in his order said:
"The documents presented by both parties regarding date of birth are the subject of evidence during trial. The documentary evidence cannot be considered at this stage for the purpose of resolving this anticipatory bail application. According to the case diary the investigation is incomplete and the victim's presence and statement are still pending. The police station's affidavit dated 01-07-2026 mentions the accused Farman's failure to cooperate with the investigation and his attempts to influence the evidence.
In view of the circumstances mentioned in all the above steps there is no such ground in the case to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail to the accused Mohd. Farman".
For context, the wife had shot to nationwide fame during the Maha Kumbh celebrations last year, after videos of her at the mela were circulated widely on social media. She had married the petitioner in March this year in Kerala.
The controversy escalated later when the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) found that the girl was allegedly a minor, about 16 years old, at the time of the marriage, and that forged documents may have been used to facilitate the wedding. Following these findings, a case was registered by the girl's father against her husband.
The Kerala High Court had on April 20 stayed the arrest of the husband, in an FIR based on an abduction complaint filed by the wife's father. Later, the Kerala High Court had one month transit anticipatory bail to the husband to him to approach a competent court in Madhya Pradesh for bail.
The couple had meanwhile approached the MP High Court, alleging that the wife's birth certificate was forged to criminalise their interfaith marriage and sought directions to restore her Birth Certificate and to conduct an independent investigation into forgery of government records. This petition is still pending in the high court.
In the present application before the trial court, it was alleged by the girl's father that the husband had enticed his daughter by offering her roles in films and songs. Thereafter, the father discovered, through Facebook and WhatsApp videos, that his daughter and Farman got married.
The counsel for the husband contended that the entire case was fabricated as the girl got married voluntarily and verified herself to be above 18 years of age.
It was further argued that the father had forged a birth certificate demonstrating his daughter to be a minor out of malice. The counsel also produced documents showing that the girl was over 18 years of age.
The Special Public Prosecutor, opposing the bail, argued that the original birth certificate showed the girl was born on December 30, 2009, while the later birth certificate submitted by the husband showed the registration date of June 5, 2025. Therefore, the birth certificate presented by the husband was alleged to be fabricated.
Case Title: Mohd Farman v State of Madhya Pradesh,
Bail Application 142/2026