The Madhya Pradesh High Court has reserved its verdict on the pleas filed by the state government and the parents of the late actor-model Twisha Sharma. They challenged the anticipatory bail granted to her mother-in-law, retired judge Giribala Singh, in connection with the alleged dowry death case. The court heard extensive submissions from all parties, including the prosecution, the complainant family, the CBI, and the defense.
Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing Twisha Sharma’s parents, argued during the hearing that Giribala Singh was granted anticipatory bail prematurely by the Bhopal district court without being required to participate in the investigation. Luthra referred to WhatsApp messages exchanged by Twisha Sharma before her death, indicating that she felt suffocated and wanted to return to her parents’ home.
The Advocate General for the Madhya Pradesh Police opposed the anticipatory bail, stating that the trial court conducted a “mini-trial” during the bail application process. Allegations were made that Giribala Singh did not cooperate with the investigation despite receiving notices. The prosecution highlighted post-mortem findings, suggesting the possibility of head injuries on Twisha Sharma’s body.
The CBI, now handling the investigation, sought custodial interrogation of Giribala Singh. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that while anticipatory bail before an FIR is not legally prohibited, the seriousness of the allegations should have been considered. The court was urged to exercise restraint due to the gravity of the case and the accused’s former judicial status.
Senior advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, representing Giribala Singh, refuted the allegations, stating they were contrary to the record and based on false statements. She argued that Giribala Singh cooperated with the probe agency and emphasized the legality of anticipatory bail in dowry death cases. The court allowed the CBI to be a party respondent and reserved its verdict in the high-profile case.
