INTRODUCTION
The recent Judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the Twisha Sharma case has attracted significant public attention. The case relates to the death of a 33-year-old woman within a few months of her marriage and allegations of dowry harassment, forced abortion and cruelty by her husband and in-laws.
While the merits of the case will ultimately be decided during trial, the High Court was dealing with a narrower issue: whether the anticipatory bail granted to the deceased’s mother-in-law was legally sustainable.
In my view, the Judgment is important because it reiterates that while anticipatory bail is an important safeguard of personal liberty, courts cannot ignore relevant material available on record, especially in serious offences involving the death of a married woman within a short period of marriage.
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
Twisha Sharma got married in December 2025. Tragically, she was found hanging in her matrimonial home in May 2026, barely six months after the marriage. Following her death, allegations were made by her family that she had been subjected to harassment for dowry and was being pressurised by her Husband and Mother-in-law.
The Mother-in-law, a retired judicial officer, approached the Sessions Court seeking anticipatory bail. What became controversial was the fact that the bail application was filed immediately after the incident and was allowed on the same day on which the FIR came to be registered.
The State, as well as the Father of the deceased, challenged the Order before the High Court.
WHY DID THE HIGH COURT INTERFERE?
The High Court found that the Sessions Court had failed to consider several important circumstances while granting anticipatory bail.
One of the factors that weighed with the Court was the Post-Mortem Report. Although the death was reported to be due to hanging, the Report also recorded multiple ante-mortem injuries on the body of the deceased. More importantly, the subsequent medical opinion indicated that these injuries could not be explained merely by the process of removing the body from the ligature or transporting it to the hospital.
The Court also noted that there were allegations regarding the termination of the deceased’s pregnancy. According to the prosecution, the pregnancy was terminated because the husband and family members allegedly questioned the paternity of the child. The Court observed that these allegations required proper investigation and could not be brushed aside at the initial stage.
WHATSAPP CHATS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS
A significant part of the case revolved around WhatsApp messages and statements of family members.
The High Court noted that the trial court had proceeded on the assumption that the allegations were mainly directed against the husband. However, after examining the material collected during the investigation, the High Court found that there were allegations not only against the husband but also against the mother-in-law.
Statements of witnesses recorded during the investigation alleged harassment, pressure regarding pregnancy and demands for dowry. The Court held that these materials could not be ignored while considering anticipatory bail.
CONDUCT AFTER GRANT OF BAIL
Another factor considered by the Court was the conduct of the Accused after obtaining anticipatory bail.
The Prosecution alleged that despite repeated notices, the Mother-in-Law was not cooperating with the investigating agency. The Court took note of these allegations while assessing whether the protection granted by the Trial Court should continue.
The Court also observed that the investigation was still at a very early stage and several important aspects of the case were yet to be examined.
AN IMPORTANT PRINCIPLE ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL
What makes this Judgment legally significant is the distinction drawn between cancellation of bail and setting aside an illegal or perverse bail order.
The High Court relied upon settled principles laid down by the Supreme Court and observed that where a court grants bail by ignoring relevant material or by considering irrelevant factors, a superior court can interfere even without proving any subsequent misconduct by the Accused.
In other words, if the original bail order itself suffers from serious legal defects, it can be quashed.
According to the High Court, that is precisely what had happened in the present case.
SARTHAK KALRA
Senior Legal Associate
The Indian Lawyer & Allied Services
MY TAKE
As a lawyer, I believe the Judgment should not be viewed as a finding of guilt against the Accused. The trial is yet to take place, and the allegations will have to be proved in accordance with the law.
However, the decision does highlight an important principle. In cases involving alleged dowry death or the unnatural death of a woman shortly after marriage, courts must carefully evaluate all available material before granting anticipatory bail. Liberty of the Accused is important, but so is the need for a fair and effective investigation.
The High Court appears to have felt that the Sessions Court granted protection without adequately considering crucial aspects of the case, including witness statements, medical evidence and the stage of investigation.
EDITOR’S COMMENTS
The Madhya Pradesh High Court’s decision serves as a reminder that anticipatory bail, particularly in serious offences, is not meant to be granted as a matter of routine. Courts must consider the gravity of the allegations, the available evidence and the requirements of a fair investigation.
Whether the allegations against the Accused are ultimately proved or not will be determined during the trial. For the present, the High Court has made it clear that where relevant material is overlooked and important circumstances are ignored, a bail order can be set aside even by a superior court.
The Judgment therefore reinforces the principle that while personal liberty is fundamental, the administration of criminal justice must not suffer because relevant facts were ignored at the stage of granting anticipatory bail.
SUSHILA RAM VARMA
Advocate & Chief Consultant
The Indian Lawyer & Allied Services
Please log onto our YouTube channel, The Indian Lawyer Legal Tips, to learn about various
aspects of the law. Our latest Video, titled Punishment for Call Recording Without Consent in India || is it legal to record a phone call? can be viewed at the link below: