The Supreme Court has taken suo motu cognisance of the death of 33-year-old corporate professional and former actor Twisha Sharma at her matrimonial home in Bhopal, amid allegations of institutional bias and lack of fairness in the police investigation.
A Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M Pancholi noted that media reports had raised concerns regarding the impartiality of the investigation because Twisha Sharma’s husband is a practising lawyer and her mother-in-law is a retired District Judge. The Court observed that “a narrative was also created that a fair investigation was being denied on account of the involvement of the judiciary.”
The Court recorded that the Madhya Pradesh High Court had already directed a second postmortem examination to clear all doubts from any quarter and to bolster the confidence of any common person in the entire process. It further noted the Solicitor General’s submission that a second autopsy had since been conducted by AIIMS Delhi doctors at Bhopal.
Taking note of the State Government’s recommendation for the transfer of the investigation, the Supreme Court said the only issue surviving was handing over the probe to the Central Bureau of Investigation. The Solicitor General assured the Court that the matter would be taken up with the authorities so that the CBI immediately takes over the investigation and makes an endeavour to complete the same promptly.
The Court also urged both the family members of the deceased and the accused persons not to make statements before the media and instead cooperate with the investigating agency.
“We would like to impress upon the family members of the victim, as well as the accused person(s), that instead of making statements in public or before media platforms, they should get their version recorded before the investigating agency so that no prejudice or adverse impact is caused to the ongoing investigation. As already observed earlier, we also request the media to avoid recording statements of the persons who are likely to be potential witnesses or accused, as it may unnecessarily prejudge the outcome on certain issues, which are yet to be investigated. We will also request the general public to refrain from speculation and have trust and faith in one of the premier investigating agency, which, we are sure, in due course of time will take the investigation to a logical conclusion.”
The Court clarified that it had expressed no opinion on the merits of the allegations.
