CBI Arrests Retired Judge Giribala Singh in Actress Twisha Sharma Death Case; High Court Flags Injury Marks, Alleged Harassment

The investigation into the death of actress Twisha Sharma intensified on Thursday after the CBI arrested her mother-in-law, retired judge Giribala Singh, from her residence in Bhopal following nearly six hours of questioning.

A CBI team reached the house around 10 am and carried out an extensive examination of the premises as part of the ongoing probe.

During the investigation, officials used a high-intensity 3D camera to conduct a detailed 360-degree recording inside the residence.

Investigators also surveyed nearby buildings and surrounding areas to determine whether the location where the incident occurred could be viewed from neighbouring terraces or balconies.

The arrest came a day after the Madhya Pradesh High Court cancelled the anticipatory bail earlier granted to Giribala Singh.

In its detailed 17-page order issued late Wednesday night, the court observed that the seriousness of the allegations, the evidence collected so far, and the stage of the investigation did not justify granting relief to the accused.

The High Court strongly criticized the lower court for allegedly failing to properly examine the case diary and evidence before granting anticipatory bail.

The bench noted that multiple injury marks were found on Twisha Sharma’s body and stated that the accused side had failed to provide a convincing explanation for those injuries.

Police officials informed the court that requests had already been sent to telecom companies seeking Call Detail Records (CDR) and tower location data linked to the mobile numbers connected with the case.

Investigators said the technical evidence would be added to the case diary once received from the telecom service providers.

Senior police officers, including Bag Sevania SHO Amit Soni and Katara Hills SHO Sunil Dubey, remained inside Giribala Singh’s residence along with the CBI team during the search operation.

Several officers were seen entering and leaving the house as the investigation continued throughout the day.

The Twisha Sharma death case has also drawn the attention of the Supreme Court, which took suo motu cognizance of the matter and heard it on May 25.

During the hearing, Chief Justice Suryakant remarked that the media should avoid aggressively pursuing statements from grieving families and allow the investigation and legal proceedings to continue in accordance with the law.

The Chief Justice also expressed concern over attempts to cast doubt on the impartiality of the judiciary, calling such developments deeply disturbing.

Meanwhile, police investigations revealed that Twisha’s husband, Samarth Singh, allegedly remained in hiding in Jabalpur for nearly ten days while absconding.

Officials said he kept his mobile phone switched off to avoid being tracked by investigators.

During questioning, Samarth reportedly admitted that he continuously changed locations while on the run and avoided direct interaction with people. Investigating agencies suspect that he may have received assistance while evading arrest.

Authorities are now trying to identify individuals who were in contact with him on May 12 and 13, the days surrounding the incident.

At the request of Twisha’s family, a second post-mortem examination was conducted on May 24 by a forensic team from AIIMS Delhi.

The procedure, which lasted nearly three hours, took place at AIIMS Bhopal before the team returned to Delhi for further analysis.

Dr Sudhir Kumar Gupta, Head of the Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology at AIIMS Delhi, stated that the final post-mortem report would take additional time as histopathology and viscera examinations were still pending.

The defence, meanwhile, argued that Twisha Sharma had died by suicide and claimed she was immediately shifted to AIIMS Bhopal after the incident.

Lawyers representing the accused maintained that police had already seized mobile phones and DVR recordings on the same day, dismissing allegations of non-cooperation with investigators.

The defence further argued that WhatsApp chats recovered during the investigation mainly con

tained allegations against Twisha’s husband rather than her mother-in-law. It also contended that anticipatory bail can only be cancelled under exceptional circumstances and claimed such conditions were absent in this case.

However, the prosecution argued that the WhatsApp conversations clearly indicated sustained mental harassment faced by Twisha.

Investigators alleged that her husband repeatedly questioned the paternity of the unborn child and pressured her to terminate the pregnancy.

According to the prosecution, Twisha had repeatedly pleaded with her family to take her back to her parental home because of the distress she was facing.

The family also alleged that they were not given complete information regarding the circumstances surrounding her death.

The prosecution further accused the trial court of overlooking crucial evidence while granting anticipatory bail.

It alleged that CCTV footage had been tampered with and claimed the lower court acted in haste while granting relief to the accused.

Investigators told the court that after Twisha became pregnant, both her husband and mother-in-law allegedly began questioning her character.

References to pressure for an abortion were also reportedly found in WhatsApp chats examined during the investigation.

The High Court observed that allegations of mental harassment, dowry demands, and coercion had consistently emerged from witness statements and evidence collected so far.

It also noted that the accused were influential individuals and that there were concerns about attempts to influence the investigation.

The court further stated that custodial interrogation of the accused was necessary considering the seriousness and complexity of the case.

Referring to the post-mortem report, the High Court noted that apart from hanging marks, several other injuries were found on Twisha’s body.

According to medical findings placed before the court, these injuries could not have been caused merely while taking the body down after the incident.

The bench concluded that such circumstances required a detailed and thorough investigation before any relief could be granted to the accused.

Statements recorded from Twisha Sharma’s family members and other witnesses reportedly claimed that she had been repeatedly pressured for an abortion by her husband and mother-in-law.

Allegations of dowry-related harassment and emotional abuse have also surfaced consistently during the investigation.

Interestingly, a day after the High Court rejected her anticipatory bail plea, Giribala Singh was seen outside her residence feeding stray dogs on Thursday morning before the CBI questioning began.

Twisha’s husband, Samarth Singh, currently remains in CBI custody till May 29. Investigators are trying to reconstruct the events of the night of May 12 and are closely examining his actions after the incident.

The agency is also verifying Samarth’s statements against technical evidence, witness accounts, and circumstantial findings as it continues to piece together the sequence of events in the high-profile case.