Bhopal, May 27: The Madhya Pradesh High Court witnessed intense debates on Wednesday regarding the high-profile Twisha Sharma death case. The court has reserved its order after hearing petitions seeking the cancellation of bail for the main accused, Giribala Singh.
During the proceedings, the Advocate General presented serious arguments on behalf of the state government. He highlighted that multiple injury marks were found on Twisha Sharma’s body. The post-mortem report revealed injuries on her right hand’s finger and other parts of her body, particularly the elbow. Most importantly, it was noted that these injuries occurred before her death.
The Advocate General questioned the trial court’s decision to grant bail to Giribala Singh, given the severity of the post-mortem findings and other initial evidence. He emphasized that the case is highly sensitive and requires a fair investigation.
The CBI, which is investigating the case, also adopted a firm stance in court. The agency’s lawyer stated that they seek Giribala Singh’s judicial custody due to several serious allegations that have emerged during the investigation. He informed the court that Giribala Singh’s sister was present during the initial post-mortem, raising concerns about potential interference in the post-mortem process.
The CBI argued that this investigation is crucial, as any interference could significantly impact the case’s direction. They believe that if there was any tampering during the post-mortem, it would be a vital aspect of the inquiry.
On the other hand, senior advocate Enosh George, representing Giribala Singh, presented the defense’s arguments. He contended that if the request to revoke bail was based on conduct after the bail was granted, the matter should have first been taken to the trial court. He argued that filing a petition directly in the High Court undermined their legal rights, as an appeal against the trial court’s decision is available in the High Court.
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta also questioned the trial court’s ruling. He stated that the grounds on which Giribala Singh was granted bail could apply to 90 percent of the population. He further remarked that granting bail before the FIR was registered was incomprehensible.
Tushar Mehta argued that the trial court did not adequately review the case diary. He accused Giribala Singh of exploiting her legal knowledge, noting that she was aware that questioning a woman could not occur in the evening, leading her to send emails and WhatsApp messages to the SHO during that time.
Leave a Comment