SC Pulls Up Mother-in-Law Giri Bala Singh Over Remarks Against Twisha Sharma, Orders CBI Probe | Key Takeaways

New Delhi: The investigation into the tragic death of 33-year-old actor and model Twisha Sharma, who was found dead in her marital home on May 12- only five months into her marriage to lawyer Samarth Singh- has arrived at a critical juncture.

A Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M Pancholi on Monday stressed that the probe into Twisha's death must be 'fair, independent, and impartial.'

Hearing the suo motu matter, the court also noted that the investigation will be handed over to the CBI without delay, consistent with the recommendation of the Madhya Pradesh state government.

SC pulls up Giri Bala

In a stern intervention during Monday’s hearing on the death of Twisha, the Supreme Court of India heavily pulled up former district judge and Twisha's mother-in-law Giri Bala Singh, accusing her of actively participating in a media campaign to malign her deceased daughter-in-law.

The bench expressed deep disapproval over the ongoing “narrative” surrounding the case. During the proceedings, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta informed the court that the accused side had been engaging in a series of media interviews aimed at discrediting the victim.

Questioning the propriety of a former judge participating in public character assassination while under investigation, the court took strong exception to reports that Giri Bala has been giving interviews in which she allegedly makes disparaging remarks about Twisha Sharma. 

The Solicitor General further apprised the bench that Giri Bala Singh had been "maligning the victim" through various media platforms and, critically, was not cooperating with the ongoing police investigation. 

The SG pointed out that despite repeated notices, the accused has been evasive, raising serious concerns regarding the obstruction of justice.

Concerns over ‘narrative’ being built

During the proceedings, the Chief Justice expressed concern regarding the 'narrative' surrounding the case, specifically addressing allegations that the investigation’s fairness was being undermined by the local authorities or the judiciary due to the fact that the victim’s mother-in-law is a former district judge and her husband is a practicing lawyer.

“We are against the narrative that is being created. That is why the CBI should take it over. We believe the state police and judiciary," the CJI observed during the proceedings.

The bench further remarked, “Whatever unfortunate incident has taken place, it should be ensured that a fair, impartial investigation takes place."

The court recorded Mehta’s assurance that he would communicate with the concerned authorities to secure an immediate transfer of the investigation to the CBI.

“The only issue as of now for our consideration is the recommendation made by the state of MP to hand over the investigation to the CBI,” he said.

Advise to media

Beyond the rebukes, the court spent a considerable amount of time discussing the ongoing media reportage and the public commentary emerging from both sides of the dispute.

"We are slightly at pain because of some of the actions. We will request our media friends to not go for the statements of the victims family or the other family. Let the things move as per law and procedure," the Chief Justice of India said.

“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 bench said.

Refrain from making public statements

The Chief Justice of India advised the families of both the victim and the accused to avoid making public statements or speaking to the media, stressing that they should instead present their accounts directly to the investigating agency to avoid prejudicing the ongoing probe.

“We would like to impress upon the family members of the victim as well as the accused that instead of making statements in the public or before media platform they should get their versions recorded before the investigating agency so that no prejudice or adverse impact is had on the ongoing investigation.”

Court cautions media

The court further cautioned the media against recording statements from potential witnesses, noting that such actions could inadvertently influence the outcome of the investigation. Additionally, it urged the public to maintain faith in the investigative process and avoid engaging in speculation.

“We are sure that in due course of time it will take the investigation to a conclusion.”

The court emphasised that it has not expressed “any opinion” on any of the allegations and that it is up to the investigating agency to look into the different aspects.

Lawyers flag delay in FIR

Raising concerns about the initial investigation, Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra pointed to a three-day delay in the FIR registration and an alleged failure to preserve critical evidence. 

Luthra also took issue with the victim’s mother-in-law independently producing call detail records, urging that these processes follow proper legal protocols. 

In response, the bench stated that since the investigation is being handed over to the CBI, procedural integrity would be maintained, and warned against further interference or public commentary. 

Justice Joymalya Bagchi also emphasized the need for a balanced view of the timeline, noting that the case has unfolded over months rather than years.

Twisha case

The court had taken suo-motu cognisance of the case titled: ‘In Re: Alleged Institutional Bias and Procedural Discrepancies in the Unnatural Death of a Young Woman at Matrimonial Home.’

The top court's decision comes amid growing public scrutiny over the investigation and judicial handling of the case. A bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant heard the matter today, a development that the victim's father, Navnidhi Sharma, described as a vital step toward restoring faith in the judicial process.

Also Read: 'CBI Probe, Autopsy Gaps': CJI-Led Bench Hears Twisha Sharma's Case As SC Takes Suo Motu Cognisance