The Madhya Pradesh High Court cancelled anticipatory bail granted to former district judge Giribala Singh in the suspicious death case of Twisha Sharma, observing that the trial court acted hastily without properly assessing medical evidence, case diary materials and surrounding circumstances before granting relief.
In a significant development in the suspicious death case of Twisha Sharma, the Madhya Pradesh High Court cancelled the anticipatory bail granted to her mother-in-law, former district judge Giribala Singh. The Court observed that the lower court had acted in haste while granting relief despite the seriousness of the allegations and the material available on record.
The order was passed by Justice Dev Narayan Mishra, who held that the anticipatory bail granted earlier by the 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal, could not be sustained in law. The High Court noted that the trial court had failed to properly evaluate the case diary, medical evidence and surrounding circumstances before extending protection to the accused.
Twisha Sharma was allegedly found hanging at her matrimonial home in Bhopal on May 12. According to the post-mortem report, the cause of death was “antemortem hanging by ligature.” However, the report also recorded the presence of “multiple antemortem injuries (simple in nature possible by blunt force over other parts of the body have been noted)” on her body.
The case attracted widespread attention after Twisha’s family accused her husband and in-laws of subjecting her to mental and physical harassment. They alleged that the family was dissatisfied with the dowry given during her marriage solemnised on December 9, 2025, and that she had repeatedly informed them about the cruelty she was facing at her matrimonial home.
During the hearing, the High Court emphasised that anticipatory bail in such serious cases should be granted only in exceptional circumstances. Justice Mishra observed that “strong reasons” are necessary for cancelling bail and clarified that a bail order can be interfered with where irrelevant considerations are taken into account or important material is ignored, making the order legally unsustainable.
Referring to the post-mortem findings, the Court said that apart from hanging marks, several other injuries were found on Twisha’s body, and the accused side had failed to provide any satisfactory explanation for them. The Bench observed that the injuries could not simply be brushed aside as marks caused while bringing the body down after the incident.
The Court further remarked that the sequence of events surrounding the death required a detailed and fair investigation. It noted that witness statements, including those of Twisha’s family members, contained serious allegations that she had been pressured by her husband and mother-in-law to undergo an abortion. Allegations relating to dowry harassment and sustained mental torture were also highlighted before the Court.
The High Court criticised the reasoning adopted by the lower court while granting anticipatory bail. The Sessions Court had observed that bail could not be denied merely because the death occurred within seven years of marriage. It had also relied on the fact that money was allegedly transferred into Twisha’s account and that WhatsApp chats mainly reflected complaints against her husband.
However, the High Court held that a closer examination of the evidence and surrounding circumstances presented a far more serious picture. According to the Court, the trial court overlooked crucial aspects of the investigation and granted relief without sufficiently appreciating the gravity of the allegations.
The Bench also noted that the accused had not fully cooperated with the investigation. It further observed that attempts were allegedly made to tarnish Twisha’s image through statements circulated in the media, which could potentially influence the ongoing probe.
Another important aspect considered by the High Court was that the investigation had since been transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The Court directed that the CBI be formally impleaded as a party in the proceedings in view of the transfer of investigation.
During arguments, the CBI and the State government submitted that after Twisha became pregnant, her husband and mother-in-law allegedly began doubting her character and pressured her to terminate the pregnancy. It was argued that these allegations were reflected in WhatsApp conversations recovered during the investigation.
The prosecution also argued that Twisha had continuously informed her family members about the mental harassment she was facing. Given the influential background of the accused, the investigating agencies contended that custodial interrogation was necessary to ensure a proper and uninfluenced investigation.
After considering the evidence, medical records, witness statements and the present stage of investigation, the High Court concluded that the anticipatory bail granted on May 15, 2026, was unjustified. Consequently, the Court set aside the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal, and allowed the petitions seeking cancellation of bail.
The ruling is being viewed as an important intervention in a case that has raised serious concerns regarding alleged dowry harassment, mental cruelty and the circumstances surrounding the death of a young woman within months of her marriage.
Factual Backgrounds:
Twisha Sharma, a 33-year-old woman from Noida, married Samarth Singh, a lawyer based in Bhopal, about five months ago. The couple had met through a dating application. She was found dead at her matrimonial home in Bhopal’s Katara Hills area on May 12, 2026. The incident drew nationwide attention after her family alleged dowry harassment, physical abuse, and possible foul play involving influential members of her in-law family.
Twisha reportedly met Samarth Singh through a dating app in 2024, and the couple married in December 2025. Samarth Singh’s mother, Giribala Singh, is a retired judicial officer and was reportedly serving as president of a consumer commission in Bhopal when the controversy came to public notice.
Twisha’s family alleged that her in-laws were responsible for her death, claiming she faced persistent domestic violence and harassment. They also demanded a second post-mortem to determine the exact cause of death. A First Information Report (FIR) has been lodged by the Katara Hills police station to investigate the death. In the FIR, Twisha’s husband and her mother-in-law, Giribal Singh (a former judge) have been booked for dowry harassment. The family additionally questioned injuries allegedly found on Twisha’s body during the initial post-mortem.
The case drew even more attention after purported chat messages and online communications attributed to Twisha were reported. In some accounts, she allegedly mentioned feeling “trapped” and “suffocated,” which her family relied on as evidence of emotional trauma.
The investigation faced criticism due to conflicting versions of events. While Twisha’s family alleged murder and dowry-linked abuse, the accused side denied harassment and claimed Twisha was dealing with mental health issues. Public outrage grew further after remarks made by Giribala Singh during media interactions were viewed as insensitive and controversial.
Forensic material and CCTV footage became central to the dispute. Reports stated that CCTV visuals allegedly showed Twisha walking toward the terrace shortly before her death. It was also reported that an autopsy report from AIIMS Bhopal suggested the cause of death was consistent with suicidal hanging. However, Twisha’s family disputed this, pointing to alleged injuries, disagreements over electronic evidence, and calls reportedly made to CCTV technicians after the incident.
Due to the mounting controversy, the matter reportedly led to the creation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), multiple court proceedings, and continued demands for an independent probe. Twisha’s husband was reported to have gone absconding following anticipatory bail proceedings, increasing scrutiny on the in-law family members.
Amid heavy public pressure and legal developments, the Madhya Pradesh Government later handed the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for an independent probe into the circumstances surrounding Twisha Sharma’s death.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE