Monalisa Bhosle, Farman Khan Get Interim Protection From Arrest In MP Over Birth Certificate Dispute

The Madhya Pradesh High Court's Indore Bench has restrained authorities from taking any coercive action against Kumbh Viral Girl Monalisa Bhosle and her husband Farman Khan in connection with an FIR registered after their interfaith marriage triggered a dispute over her birth certificate, till the next date of hearing.

A single bench of Justice Gajendra Singh passed the order while hearing the writ petition filed by the couple against the State of Madhya Pradesh and others, seeking restoration of Bhosle's birth certificate and a probe into the alleged fabrication of records that were used to depict her as a minor after her marriage to Khan. The petition, originally filed in May this year under Article 226 of the Constitution, had invoked the couple's right to choose a life partner under Article 21, relying on the Supreme Court's rulings in Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M. and Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India.

The court was hearing an application seeking amendment to the array of parties. The petitioners sought to substitute respondent no.1 with the Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh, and to implead the Nagar Parishad, Maheshwar, through its Chief Municipal Officer, District Khargone, as respondent no.5, since it was this civic body that had issued Bhosle's original birth certificate.

Allowing the plea, the court recorded that the amendment was sought "as the Birth Certificate was issued by Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Maheshwar, District Khargone (M.P.)." The bench directed that the necessary amendments in the memo of petition be carried out within three working days, and ordered that notices be issued to respondent no.3 and the newly added respondent no.5 on payment of process fee within the same period. Since the state authorities were already represented by the Additional Advocate General on advance notice, the court held that no further notices were required to them.

Recording the background of the case, the order noted that the petition had "been preferred seeking the relief in connection with cancellation of Birth Certificate of petitioner no.1 by respondent no.5 after solemnizing of marriage between petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 resulting registration of FIR bearing Crime No.0112/2026 registered at Police Station Maheshwar, District Khargone, M.P. at the behest of respondent no.3."

Taking note of the submissions made by counsel for both sides, the court granted interim protection to the couple, holding that "no coercive action against the petitioners pursuant to the FIR No.0112/2026 registered at Police Station Maheshwar, District Khargone be initiated till the next date of hearing."

Senior Advocate Vivek Krishna Tankha, along with advocate Jerry Lopes, appeared for the petitioners, while Additional Advocate General Rahul Sethi, along with Government Advocate Sunit Kapoor, appeared and represented the state respondents before the bench.

The dispute stems from a writ petition filed earlier before the same bench, in which Bhosle and Khan had alleged that after their marriage in Kerala, her family fabricated documents to falsely portray her as a minor, resulting in the cancellation of her genuine birth certificate issued by the Maheshwar civic body and the registration of a criminal case against Khan. According to the couple, Kerala Police had verified Bhosle's Aadhaar, PAN, voter identification card and birth certificate through official portals before the marriage was solemnised, and had confirmed that she had attained majority. The couple had contended that the campaign against them, including branding the marriage as an act of "Love Jihad," was aimed at communal targeting and endangered their safety.

The court has directed that the matter be listed in the week commencing July 27, 2026. It has also clarified that in case of any default in payment of the process fee within the stipulated period, the order of interim relief shall stand vacated without further reference to the court.

Case Title: Petitioner No.1 and Petitioner No.2 vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others

Date of Order: July 13, 2026

Bench: Justice Gajendra Singh