This Twisha Sharma case is again back in spotlight,and honestly,it feels like every hearing is bringing more uncomfortable questions than answers . Madhya Pradesh High Court on Wednesday kept its verdict on hold on petitions challenging anticipatory bail granted to Giribala Singh .
Giribala Singh is mother-in-law of late actor-model Twisha Sharma,who died under mysterious circumstances . A single-judge Bench led by Justice Devnarayan Mishra heard arguments from CBI,state government and victim's family before reserving decision .
And tbh,this is where whole bail issue becomes sensitive . Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra,appearing for parents of deceased,argued that Bhopal district court acted prematurely while granting bail .
He pointed towards WhatsApp messages sent by Twisha Sharma shortly before her death on May 12 . In those messages,she allegedly described feeling suffocated in her matrimonial home . Not small thing ah,especially when case involves dowry death allegations and family is saying trial court ignored major material.
Few things standing out from hearing:
- CBI argued that custodial interrogation is necessary for a thorough probe .
- Case was moved to CBI following public outcry over initial police investigation.
- State counsel alleged that former judge has not joined probe despite multiple notices.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta,appearing for CBI,also questioned how trial court handled matter . He suggested court should have shown more caution considering gravity of allegations,and said retired judicial officer status of accused should not lead to preferential treatment.
Mehta stated,"The trial court could have waited for day to consider the facts," while also raising concern that media interactions may influence witnesses . That part also adds another layer because once case becomes public spectacle,witnesses and narratives both can get affected.
But defense side gave totally different picture . Senior advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan defended Giribala Singh and said allegations were factually incorrect . She claimed her client had fully cooperated and even handed over mobile device to authorities.
Defense also argued that main grievances in WhatsApp chats were against husband,Samarth Singh,and not mother-in-law . They even cited affectionate exchanges to say relationship was normal . So now court has two very different versions in front of it,and somewhere between those chats,bail order,CBI demand and family’s pain,the real picture is still hanging…
