The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Tuesday set aside the anticipatory bail granted to retired judge Giribala Singh in the high-profile Twisha Sharma death case, holding that the trial court had overlooked crucial evidence, failed to properly assess witness statements and ignored serious allegations surrounding the death of the 33-year-old woman at her matrimonial home in Bhopal.

In a strongly worded 17-page order, Justice Devnarayan Mishra quashed the anticipatory bail granted by the Bhopal Sessions Court, paving the way for custodial interrogation.

The Court observed that the lower court had placed undue reliance on documents produced by the defence while disregarding important material collected during the investigation, including WhatsApp chats, witness statements, allegations of dowry harassment and the suspicious circumstances surrounding Twisha Sharma’s death.

As per the case records, Twisha Sharma married Samarth Singh, son of Giribala Singh, on December 9, 2025. She died barely five months later, on May 12, 2026, allegedly by hanging inside her matrimonial home in Bhopal.

The High Court took particular note of allegations emerging from WhatsApp chats and witness testimonies. According to the order, Twisha was allegedly subjected to repeated harassment over her pregnancy, while her husband and in-laws allegedly questioned the paternity of the unborn child and pressured her to terminate the pregnancy.

The Court also referred to statements allegedly made by Twisha to her family members, where she said she was “badly stuck”, was not allowed to live peacefully or even cry freely, and wanted to leave her matrimonial home.

Further, the Court highlighted the postmortem findings, which revealed six ante-mortem injuries on Twisha’s body, including injuries on her arm, finger and head. The order specifically recorded that these injuries could not have been caused while removing the body from the ligature or during transportation to the hospital.

The High Court observed that statements given by Twisha’s parents and relatives consistently alleged harassment by both Samarth Singh and Giribala Singh from the very beginning of the investigation.

It also took serious note of allegations that Giribala Singh, a retired judicial officer trained in cyber crime, cyber forensics and crime scene management, may have used her expertise to tamper with evidence and influence the investigation.

Another concern raised before the Court related to the alleged circulation of selective CCTV footage in the media and on social media platforms. The prosecution argued that although the police had already seized CCTV footage from the residence, selective clips were allegedly leaked publicly in a manner that could amount to tampering with evidence and influencing public perception.

The Court further appeared concerned over the conduct allegedly adopted by the accused after Twisha’s death. The prosecution claimed that despite repeated notices issued on multiple occasions, Giribala Singh did not fully cooperate with investigators and instead held press conferences allegedly maligning the deceased.

In its observations, the High Court remarked that the trial court had failed to consider the statutory presumption applicable in dowry death cases, ignored significant witness statements and prematurely accepted defence explanations at a stage when the investigation was still at a nascent stage.

Considering the gravity of the allegations, the suspicious circumstances surrounding the death, the possibility of influencing evidence and the accusations of dowry harassment and pressure for abortion, the Court held that the anticipatory bail order could not withstand judicial scrutiny.

Accordingly, the High Court quashed the anticipatory bail granted on May 15 by the 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal, in the case registered under Sections 80(2), 85 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, along with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.