Signing you in

Monalisa, from Indore, shot to fame during the Prayagraj Kumbh Mela for her captivating smile and striking eyes. She travelled to Kerala in March and reportedly sought police protection to live with her boyfriend Farmaan, following which the couple’s marriage was held under official supervision.

When the matter came before the High Court earlier, interim protection from arrest had been granted to the husband.

During the hearing on Friday, the ASG submitted, "The offence falls under the Atrocities Act. Section 3(2)(v) is invoked. Because of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act, the anticipatory bail is not maintainable. The victim belongs to the Scheduled Tribe community. The first petitioner does not belong to the SC/ST community".

Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act provides that any person committing an offence punishable with imprisonment of 10 years or more against a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe shall be liable for life imprisonment and fine.

During the proceedings, the couple sought permission to amend their anticipatory bail plea. The Madhya Pradesh Police opposed the move, contending that the proposed amendments were aimed at curing deficiencies already pointed out by the prosecution during earlier hearings.

ASG Raju argued that the facts sought to be introduced through the amendment were already within the petitioners’ knowledge at the time of filing the original plea and therefore could not be treated as subsequent developments. He accused the couple of hiding important facts and trying to cover the gaps in their case after the state raised objections.

Responding to the objection, Justice Kauser Edappagath observed, “Already there were sufficient pleadings, but the exact wording was not there.”

Senior advocate Sasindran, appearing for the couple, defended the amendment plea and said the bail application had been filed in Kerala because the couple faced serious threats over their interfaith marriage. Referring to photographs allegedly showing marriage pictures being burnt and attacked by "fundamentalists", he argued that the couple feared travelling to Madhya Pradesh.

After hearing the parties, the court extended the interim order protecting the couple from arrest till June 2 and said it would hear further arguments if it decided to allow the amendment application.