Did the sessions court grant relief too quickly in the Twisha Sharma death case?
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has now cancelled the anticipatory bail of retired judge Giribala Singh after serious allegations and injury details surfaced.
JABALPUR: The Madhya Pradesh High Court has cancelled the anticipatory bail granted to Giribala Singh, mother-in-law of deceased Noida-based woman Twisha Sharma, in the alleged dowry death case.
Giribala Singh is a retired judge and currently serving as the president of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Madhya Pradesh.
Justice Devnarayan Mishra passed the order on Wednesday after hearing arguments from both sides. The detailed order became available around midnight.
“In light of above factual aspects of the case and the allegation levelled against the respondent (Giribala Singh), the anticipatory bail order dated 15.05.2026 passed in BA No.1485/2026 by 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Crime No.133/2026 (newly registered as Book No.1504 Serial No.10, District-New Delhi, P.S. SC-III/ND vide FIR No.RC0522026S0004 dated 25.05.2026) for the offense punishable under Sections 80(2), 85, 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, is hereby quashed,” the High Court stated.
The Court observed that statements given by Twisha Sharma’s family contained allegations not only against her husband Samarth Singh but also against her mother-in-law Giribala Singh. The Court also referred to WhatsApp chats allegedly sent by Twisha to her family before her death, where allegations against her mother-in-law were mentioned.
The High Court further noted that the post-mortem report showed multiple injuries on Twisha Sharma’s body before her death.
“As per postmortem report, the death was due to antemortem hanging by ligature but from the postmortem, it is also clear that six other injuries were found in the body of the deceased in which four injuries were on the left arm, one in ring figure and one is on the head and that was antemortem. From the query report, it is also clear that these injuries were not caused due to taking out the body from the ligature or carrying out to the hospital,” the Court said.
Twisha Sharma, who was based in Noida, had married Bhopal lawyer Samarth Singh nearly five months ago after reportedly meeting through a dating application. She was found dead at her Bhopal residence on May 12.
Her family accused the in-laws of harassment and domestic violence, following which an FIRwas registered at Katara Hills police station.
Earlier, a sessions court had granted anticipatory bail to Giribala Singh on May 15. The trial court had observed that the main allegations were against husband Samarth Singh.
Twisha Sharma’s father Navnidhi Sharma and the State government challenged that order before the High Court.
Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra, appearing for Twisha Sharma’s father, argued before the Court that the parents were allegedly not informed about the death and were not involved during the inquest proceedings.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the State government, argued that the anticipatory bail was granted hurriedly without proper examination of the material available in the case.
Luthra and Mehta also objected to media interactions allegedly given by Giribala Singh. They argued that such interviews attempted to create a narrative against the deceased woman’s character even before the investigation concluded.
“The person is wielding power in the institution. It is by those who has the wherewithal. The bail was granted same day. The (trial) court could have waited a day or two examined well. The petitioner was a former judge and continuing judicial officer. Somebody has lost a life. In less than 24 hours, bail is granted. In a situation where people are languishing in jail, she got relief within 24 hours…Press conferences are held with confidence few politicians exhibit. It influences witnesses. It creates a narrative. The lady (Twisha Sharma) has liberal views. Are you casting aspersions on the character? On the daughter-in-law? The narrative was that she has liberal views. The mother of the deceased says contact your mother-in-law. This is the mistake every mother says. This is problem in India. We say try and pull on. This results in a situation which leads to nothing but suicide,” Mehta summed up.
Advocate General Prashant Singh, appearing for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), also referred to the post-mortem report and stated that the injuries found on Twisha Sharma’s body were caused before her death.
Senior Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, appearing for Giribala Singh, argued that there were no direct allegations requiring custodial interrogation of her client. She also pointed out that Giribala Singh is in her 60s and claimed that media statements were made only because journalists were repeatedly approaching her residence.
After hearing all sides, the High Court decided to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to Giribala Singh.
Advocates Yash S Vijay and Enosh George assisted Ramakrishnan in the matter.
Meanwhile, Samarth Singh had also approached the High Court seeking protection from arrest after his anticipatory bail plea was rejected by the sessions court. However, he later withdrew his plea on May 22 after the High Court observed that he could surrender before the investigating officer or the trial court.
In another development, Twisha Sharma’s family had demanded a second post-mortem examination to determine the exact cause of death. The High Court allowed the request on May 22 and directed a team of doctors from All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi to conduct the inquiry in Bhopal.
The case continues to attract national attention due to the serious allegations, involvement of senior legal personalities, and questions being raised over the speed of relief granted during the early stage of investigation.
Laws & Sections Explained
| LAW / SECTION | EXPLANATION |
| Section 80(2), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 | Deals with dowry death where death of a woman occurs under suspicious circumstances within a specified period of marriage and cruelty or harassment related to dowry is alleged |
| Section 85, BNS, 2023 | Relates to cruelty or harassment by husband or relatives of husband |
| Section 3(5), BNS, 2023 | Deals with criminal liability where multiple persons act together with common intention |
| Section 3, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 | Punishment for giving or taking dowry |
| Section 4, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 | Punishment for demanding dowry directly or indirectly |
| Anticipatory Bail | Legal protection from arrest before actual arrest takes place |
| Custodial Interrogation | Police questioning while accused is in custody |
| Post-Mortem Report | Medical examination conducted after death to determine cause and injuries |
| Ante-Mortem Injuries | Injuries caused before death |
| Inquest Proceedings | Official inquiry conducted into cause of unnatural death |
Key Timeline
| DATE | EVENT |
| May 12, 2026 | Twisha Sharma found dead in Bhopal |
| May 15, 2026 | Sessions Court grants anticipatory bail to Giribala Singh |
| May 22, 2026 | High Court allows second post-mortem by AIIMS team |
| May 22, 2026 | Samarth Singh withdraws anticipatory bail plea |
| May 25, 2026 | FIR registered as RC0522026S0004 |
| May 27, 2026 | High Court cancels anticipatory bail |
Case Details
| PARTICULARS | DETAILS |
| Case Title | Navnidhi Sharma vs State of Madhya Pradesh & Another |
| Related Accused | Giribala Singh |
| Deceased | Twisha Sharma |
| Husband | Samarth Singh |
| Court | Madhya Pradesh High Court |
| Bench | Justice Devnarayan Mishra |
| Nature of Matter | Cancellation of Anticipatory Bail |
| FIR Details | FIR No. RC0522026S0004 dated 25.05.2026 |
| Original Crime Number | Crime No.133/2026 |
| Police Station | P.S. SC-III/ND |
| Sessions Bail Case | BA No.1485/2026 |
| Earlier Bail Granted By | 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal |
| Date of Earlier Bail Order | 15.05.2026 |
Counsels Appearing
| SIDE | COUNSEL |
| Twisha Sharma’s Father | Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra |
| State of Madhya Pradesh | Solicitor General Tushar Mehta |
| CBI | Advocate General Prashant Singh |
| Giribala Singh | Senior Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan |
| Assisting Counsel for Giribala Singh | Advocates Yash S Vijay and Enosh George |
Key Takeaways
- In every matrimonial death case, the husband and his family are immediately treated as guilty in public discourse even before investigation concludes.
- Media trials and emotional narratives routinely destroy reputations of men and their families before evidence is tested in court.
- Dowry and cruelty laws continue to allow sweeping allegations against multiple family members, including elderly parents, often without immediate scrutiny of individual roles.
- The legal system still lacks equal conversation around mental health, marital incompatibility, emotional abuse against men, and pressures inside toxic marriages.
- Fair investigation must mean evidence-based accountability — not gender-based assumptions. Justice cannot survive if accusation itself becomes punishment.
This Could Change Your Case-Get FREE Legal Advice-Click Here!
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the Indian courts and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of “ShoneeKapoor.com” or its affiliates. This article is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content provided is not legal advice, and viewers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Viewer discretion is advised.