JUSTICE MOVED, NOT ABANDONED: SUPREME COURT FREEZES BHOPAL TRIAL IN TWISHA SHARMA DEATH CASE, CONSIDERS SHIFT TO DELHI
October 17, 2026
NEW DELHI, OCTOBER 17, 2026: The Supreme Court on Friday stayed the trial in the death of former model Twisha Sharma before a Bhopal sessions court and issued notices to her husband, Samarth Singh, her mother-in-law, Giribala Singh, and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), seeking their responses to a plea for transferring the proceedings to Delhi.
The petition was filed by Twisha’s father, Navnidhi Sharma, who has expressed apprehension that his daughter’s case may not receive a fair trial in Madhya Pradesh because of the influence he believes her in-laws wield in the state. He has sought the transfer of the proceedings to Delhi or another suitable location outside Madhya Pradesh.
Twisha, 33, was found hanging at her matrimonial home in Bhopal on May 12. Her family has alleged dowry harassment and abetment to suicide, while her husband and mother-in-law have denied allegations of foul play. The CBI, which took over the investigation, filed a chargesheet against the two, accusing them of abetment to suicide.
Samarth Singh is an advocate, while his mother, Giribala Singh, is a former district judge. Their professional and judicial backgrounds have formed part of the concerns raised by Twisha’s family about the fairness of proceedings in Bhopal. The allegations of undue influence remain the family’s apprehension and have not been established as fact by the court.
The Supreme Court’s intervention temporarily halts the trial while the transfer petition is considered. By seeking responses from the accused and the investigating agency, the court has initiated the process of examining whether the case should continue in Bhopal or be heard elsewhere.
The death has triggered a prolonged legal dispute, with Twisha’s family repeatedly raising concerns about the investigation and seeking accountability over the circumstances surrounding her death. The CBI’s involvement followed earlier concerns about the handling of the case by state authorities.
The latest order does not determine the guilt or innocence of the accused, nor does it decide the transfer petition. Instead, it places the question of the trial’s location before the Supreme Court, which will consider the competing submissions before deciding the matter.
The proceedings now hinge on the responses to the court’s notices and its subsequent consideration of whether transferring the trial is necessary to safeguard the fairness and credibility of the judicial process.
