Murder of Husband 1 Month After Marriage in Bihar, Planned in Wedding Mandap, Had Affair with 60-Year-Old Uncle

In a quiet village nestled within Aurangabad’s Nabi Nagar police jurisdiction, a gruesome crime has shattered the illusion of marital bliss, exposing a chilling plot woven over 15 years. The murder of 28-year-old Priyanshu Kumar Singh, just 45 days after his wedding, reveals not only a tale of forbidden love but a systemic failure to address toxic familial dynamics in rural India. The accused—his wife Gunja Devi, her maternal uncle Jeevan Singh, and two hired assailants—embody a collision of tradition, obsession, and lawlessness that demands scrutiny beyond sensational headlines.

The Crime: A Calculated Ambush

On the evening of June 24, 2025, Priyanshu was returning to his home in Barwan village after a trip to Varanasi. Unbeknownst to him, his wife Gunja Devi had relayed his travel details to Jeevan Singh, her 42-year-old uncle and longtime lover. Armed with this information, Jeevan orchestrated an ambush near Nabi Nagar Railway Station. Hired shooters, later identified as Mukesh Sharma and Jaishankar Choubey from Jharkhand’s Garhwa district, fired multiple shots at Priyanshu, leaving him dead on the spot. The brutality of the act—executed in a public area—underscores the perpetrators’ brazen disregard for both human life and legal consequences.

The Backstory: A 15-Year Forbidden Affair

Investigations by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) revealed a disturbing timeline. Gunja and Jeevan’s relationship began when she was a teenager, evolving into a clandestine affair that survived multiple attempts by her family to “correct” her path. Jeevan, leveraging his position as a patriarchal figure, systematically sabotaged Gunja’s previous marriage proposals. Family pressure ultimately forced her into a union with Priyanshu, a man she barely knew. However, the marriage became a facade; Gunja and Jeevan continued their liaison via incessant phone calls and photo exchanges, evidence of which was later extracted from their mobile devices.

The SIT’s findings highlight a critical societal blind spot: the normalization of coercive familial control. Gunja’s father, despite being aware of her resistance to the marriage, prioritized social conformity over his daughter’s agency—a pattern echoing countless honor-driven narratives across rural India.

The Motive: Elimination Over Emancipation

Why resort to murder? The answer lies in a toxic blend of possessiveness and impatience. Jeevan, unwilling to endure the charade of Gunja’s marriage, viewed Priyanshu as an obstacle to their unorthodox union. Rather than seeking legal separation or confronting familial pressures, the duo opted for extreme violence. This decision reflects a broader cultural malaise where women’s autonomy is often stifled, and conflicts are “resolved” through patriarchal collusion rather than dialogue.

Investigative Breakthroughs and Ongoing Manhunts

The SIT’s swift action led to three arrests within days. Gunja, Mukesh, and Jaishankar are now in judicial custody, while Jeevan remains at large. Key evidence includes:

Digital Footprints: Call records and WhatsApp messages between Gunja and Jeevan, detailing the murder plot.
Geolocation Data: Gunja’s real-time updates on Priyanshu’s whereabouts, timestamped to match the crime.
Forensic Analysis: Ballistic reports linking the murder weapon to Mukesh, a known criminal with prior arms-related charges.

Despite these advances, the case exposes glaring gaps in rural policing. Jeevan’s ability to evade capture—aided by porous inter-district borders and inadequate surveillance—highlights the challenges of law enforcement in India’s hinterlands.

Societal Reckoning: Beyond the Crime Scene

This tragedy forces a uncomfortable examination of rural India’s social fabric:

The Paradox of Family Honor: Gunja’s father, while complicit in her forced marriage, is now a grieving stakeholder. His role exemplifies how “honor” is weaponized to control women, often with catastrophic outcomes.
Normalized Forbidden Relationships: The 15-year affair, though morally contested, was an open secret within the community. Yet, no intervention occurred—a testament to the taboo surrounding intra-familial relationships and the stigma of reporting such “private matters.”
Youth and Criminal Exploitation: The hired assailants, both in their early 20s, represent a generation lured into crime by economic desperation. Their involvement underscores the need for job creation and mental health support in marginalized regions.

Legal and Cultural Crossroads

The case is registered under Sections 302 (murder), 120B (criminal conspiracy), and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code. However, legal frameworks alone cannot address the root causes. Cultural shifts are imperative:

Community Vigilance: Local panchayats must move beyond punitive measures to proactive counseling for families in conflict.
Women’s Empowerment Programs: State initiatives like Bihar’s Jeevika program could be replicated to provide financial independence to women like Gunja, reducing reliance on toxic relationships.
Police Reforms: The SIT’s success contrasts with the initial inertia of local police. Investing in forensic training and digital tools for rural stations is critical.

Conclusion: A Mirror to Rural India’s Silent Struggles

Priyanshu’s murder is more than a crime of passion—it is a symptom of systemic rot. The interplay of forced marriages, patriarchal dominance, and economic deprivation creates a tinderbox where violence becomes an outlet for unresolved grievances. As the SIT hunts for Jeevan, the broader question remains: How many more lives must unravel before India’s heartland confronts its silent epidemics?

For now, the Barwan case serves as a grim reminder that progress cannot be measured by urban skylines alone. True development lies in empowering villages to break free from cycles of violence—one family, one conversation, and one reformed institution at a time.

Play video :