New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Monday cleared the way for a full-fledged probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the death case of Twisha Sharma, while strongly cautioning both sides against making public statements through the media.
Hearing the suo motu matter related to the case, a bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V M Pancholi, said the investigation must proceed strictly according to law without interference or competing media narratives.
The court also urged all stakeholders to place trust in the CBI and allow the agency to complete its investigation independently.
Supreme Court warns against media trial
During the hearing, the bench expressed concern over public statements being made by individuals connected to the case.
The court specifically requested both parties to avoid speaking to television channels or making comments that could influence the ongoing investigation.
“All stakeholders refrain from speculation and have trust and faith in premier probe agency CBI to take investigation to logical conclusion,” the bench observed.
The court further stated that any statements related to the case should be made only before investigating authorities or through legal proceedings rather than through media platforms.
Chief Justice Surya Kant remarked that the court was “slightly at pain” over certain actions and cautioned against creating narratives that could affect the fairness of the investigation.
Solicitor General raises concerns during hearing
Appearing for the state, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta alleged before the court that the victim’s mother-in-law, Giribala Singh, had made public remarks about Twisha Sharma after her death.
Mehta alleged that statements questioning the victim’s character and behaviour were being circulated publicly while the investigation was ongoing.
During the hearing, he also remarked that “it is better to have a divorced daughter than a deceased daughter,” highlighting concerns regarding the treatment of women facing marital issues.
The Solicitor General further claimed that the accused was not cooperating fully with investigators while simultaneously appearing in media interviews.
Court concerned over allegations of institutional bias
The Supreme Court also addressed concerns surrounding perceptions that the judiciary was obstructing a fair investigation because one of the accused is reportedly a former judge.
The bench noted that narratives suggesting institutional protection could undermine public confidence in the legal process.
Earlier, the apex court had taken suo motu cognisance of the matter based on media reports and surrounding circumstances related to alleged procedural irregularities and concerns raised by the victim’s family.
Family alleges dowry harassment and foul play
Twisha Sharma, originally from Noida, was found dead at her matrimonial home in the Katara Hills area of Bhopal earlier this month.
Her family has alleged dowry harassment, destruction of evidence and murder involving her husband and in-laws.
They have also raised concerns over alleged procedural lapses and influence in the initial stages of the investigation, demanding an independent probe.
Police officials, however, have reportedly maintained that preliminary findings so far point towards suicide, though the matter remains under investigation.
CBI probe expected to intensify investigation
With the Supreme Court now allowing the matter to proceed without interference, the CBI is expected to carry forward a detailed investigation into the circumstances surrounding Twisha Sharma’s death.
The case has attracted nationwide attention due to allegations involving influential individuals and concerns raised regarding fairness and transparency in the probe.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s intervention in the Twisha Sharma death case has reinforced the importance of an independent investigation while warning against media-driven narratives. As the CBI prepares to intensify its probe, the case continues to raise wider questions around dowry harassment allegations, institutional accountability and public trust in investigations.