The courtroom fell into a brief silence as the words landed, measured, but hard to ignore. Before the Supreme Court of India, Twisha Sharma’s death was no longer just a legal case, but a reminder of the pressures and expectations that can weigh heavily within families.
Appearing for the Madhya Pradesh government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said, “For parents, it is better to have a divorced daughter than to have a dead one.” The remark came as a reflection on the social stigma around divorce and the choices many women are forced to navigate.
At the start of the suo motu hearing, the court asked the state to hand over the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation. At the same time, it urged the media and those involved in the case to exercise restraint and allow the investigation to proceed as per the law.
The bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi, asked the Madhya Pradesh government whether a CBI investigation could be initiated. Appearing for the state, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta responded that the agency would take over the probe and assured the court that necessary administrative steps would be set in motion immediately.
The court said Twisha Sharma had suffered an unfortunate, unnatural death and acknowledged the emotional trauma faced by her family. “It’s a case of unnatural death,” the bench observed.
“The kind of agony it causes to family and near and dear ones, we all have sympathy. But there is a procedure under law,” the court said.
The Chief Justice also stressed that the court did not want to pre-judge issues that were yet to be investigated and urged the public to trust the CBI. “We request people to have faith in the premier investigation agency,” the CJI said.
The court’s intervention comes against the backdrop of growing public attention and competing narratives around the case, something the judges appeared keen to contain within the framework of law. At one point during the hearing, the Chief Justice expressed concern over the way the matter was unfolding outside the courtroom. “We are slightly in pain because of some of the actions,” he observed, appealing to the media to refrain from publishing statements made by the victim’s family or the accused. The court stressed that such disclosures could prejudice an investigation that is still underway.
The case, titled 'In Re: Alleged Institutional Bias and Procedural Discrepancies in the Unnatural Death of Young Woman at Matrimonial Home', was taken up suo motu after reports suggested the possibility of bias in the initial investigation. The concern stemmed in part from the professional backgrounds of the accused—Twisha’s husband, Samarth Singh, is a practising advocate, while her mother-in-law, Giribala Singh, is a former district judge.
The bench noted that these circumstances had contributed to a perception that the investigation may not have been entirely neutral, prompting judicial scrutiny at an early stage. At the same time, the court made it clear that it was not drawing conclusions but ensuring that the process remains fair and credible.
The court also made an appeal to the media to exercise restraint in publishing the statements of the victims and the accused. "We are slightly in pain because of some of the actions. We will request our media friends not to go for the statements of the victim's family or the other family. Let the things move as per law and procedure," the Chief Justice of India said.
Pained by the narrative built around the investigation in the Twisha case, the bench said, “The reason that was reported for the alleged lack of impartiality was that the husband of the deceased is a practising lawyer and the mother is a former district judge. The question was whether undue influence can be exercised in an investigation.”
Also read
- 'Narrative being created': SC bars media from recording Twisha Sharma's family statements
- SC to hear Twisha Sharma case today; family says ‘forced to compromise on Hindu rituals’
- Twisha died three days before a planned meeting with her brother in Ajmer; family alleges Samarth refused to let her travel
- Twisha Sharma death: Husband recalls fights during interrogation, says pregnancy changed her behaviour
During the hearing, Mehta pointed to what he described as a trigger for the escalating media coverage. According to him, one of the potential accused had been appearing on television channels and making statements that cast aspersions on the deceased, which in turn provoked responses from the other side. He also submitted that the individual in question had not been cooperating with the investigation.
On behalf of the accused, senior advocate Siddharth Dave raised concerns about the extent of media reporting, noting that even statements recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code had found their way into the public domain. Another senior counsel, Siddharth Luthra, pointed to alleged lapses in the early stages of the investigation, including a delay in the registration of the FIR and the failure to preserve crucial evidence.
The Solicitor General also informed the court that a second autopsy had been conducted by a team from AIIMS Bhopal, following directions from the Madhya Pradesh High Court. This step was taken after the victim’s family expressed doubts about the initial findings and sought a fresh examination to ascertain the exact cause of death.
Twisha Sharma, 33, was found dead at her matrimonial home in Bhopal’s Katara Hills on May 12. Her family has alleged sustained harassment and domestic violence, accusing her husband and in-laws of abetment to suicide and dowry-related cruelty. Her husband has since surrendered and is in police custody, while proceedings continue regarding the anticipatory bail granted to her mother-in-law.
