Twisha Sharma Death Case: MP High Court Advances Hearing On Pleas Against Giribala Singh’s Anticipatory Bail

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Monday expedited proceedings in the Twisha Sharma death case and advanced the hearing on petitions seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to retired judicial officer Giribala Singh, the mother-in-law of the deceased woman.

The matter, which has attracted significant public attention, was heard by Justice Devnarayan Mishra, who directed the respondents to file their replies and fixed May 27, 2026, for further hearing.

Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for the victim’s family along with Advocate Anurag Shrivastava, informed the Court that a team of medical experts constituted by the Director of AIIMS, Delhi had visited Bhopal and conducted the examination directed in connected proceedings.

Sr. Adv. Luthra submitted that following the withdrawal of the anticipatory bail plea filed by co-accused Samarth Singh, two matters now remained for consideration before the Court, one filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh and another by the victim’s side seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to Giribala Singh.

Appearing for Giribala Singh, Senior Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan raised an objection regarding service of notice in the petition filed by the victim’s family. She submitted that while notice had been served in the State’s petition, the victim’s challenge had not been separately served and no notice had been ordered in that matter. She argued that the victim’s petition contained additional documents and grounds beyond those relied upon by the State and therefore required an independent opportunity to respond.

Also Read: BCI Suspends Advocate Samarth Singh’s Licence Amid Probe Into Wife Twisha Sharma’s Death

The Court acknowledged the concern and observed that if additional grounds had been raised by the victim’s family, principles of fairness required that the respondent be given an opportunity to answer them. Justice Mishra remarked that courts must ensure adequate hearing to all parties so that no grievance later survives that an order was passed without notice or hearing. The Court therefore directed issuance of notice in the victim’s petition as well and permitted the respondents to file their replies.

During the hearing, Luthra argued that the victim’s family had a right to support the State’s challenge to the anticipatory bail order. Stressing the urgency of the matter, he contended that the premises connected to the case remained under the respondents’ control and apprehensions regarding preservation of evidence persisted.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the State of Madhya Pradesh along with Advocate General Prashant Singh, reiterated concerns regarding the anticipatory bail granted to Giribala Singh.

Referring to proceedings before the Supreme Court, Mehta noted that the Supreme Court had directed restraint in public statements concerning the case and had recorded assurances regarding the transfer of investigation to the CBI. He submitted that the challenge before the High Court related to an anticipatory bail order passed on May 15, shortly after the application had been filed.

Emphasising the urgency of the challenge, Mehta argued that every passing day carried the risk of destruction or tampering of evidence. He urged the Court to take up the matter at the earliest possible date. “Every day there is an apprehension of the evidence being destroyed,” he submitted while seeking immediate consideration of the petitions.

The Court initially indicated that the matter would be taken up on May 29 to enable filing of responses. However, both the victim’s side and the State pressed for an earlier date. Solicitor General Tushar mehta argued that if anticipatory bail could be obtained within a day of filing, the respondents should also be prepared to answer the challenge without substantial delay.

Also Read: Giribala Singh Maligning Twisha Sharma Constantly, Not Cooperating: SG Tushar Mehta in SC

Taking note of the submissions and the seriousness of the allegations, the Court ultimately advanced the hearing to May 27 at 2:30 PM. The respondents were directed to file their replies before the next date and furnish copies to the opposing parties. The Court clarified that replies could be filed separately or through a common response addressing both petitions.

The case arises from the death of 33-year-old Twisha Sharma at her matrimonial home in Bhopal on May 12. An FIR was subsequently registered invoking provisions relating to dowry death, cruelty by husband or relatives, common intention and offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act. The challenge to Giribala Singh’s anticipatory bail is expected to be heard in detail on May 27, 2026.

Case Title: The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Smt. Giribala Singh with connected matter

Date of Hearing: May 25, 2026

Bench: Justice Devnarayan Mishra