Twisha Sharma death case: CBI FIR mentions Rs 2 lakh dowry demand during wedding ‘vidai’

According to details accessed from the CBI FIR, Giribala Singh allegedly demanded Rs 2 lakh from Twisha’s family at the time of her ‘vidai’ following her marriage to Samarth Singh in December last year

By  Jasleen Kaur May 26th 2026 12:24 PM

Twisha Sharma death case: The investigation into the death of model-actor Twisha Sharma has taken a significant turn after the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) formally registered a dowry death case against her husband Samarth Singh and mother-in-law Giribala Singh, a retired district judge.

According to details accessed from the CBI FIR, Giribala Singh allegedly demanded Rs 2 lakh from Twisha’s family at the time of her ‘vidai’ following her marriage to Samarth Singh in December last year. The FIR states that the amount was paid by Twisha’s family after repeated insistence from the accused side.

The central agency took over the probe from the Bhopal Police earlier this week after the Madhya Pradesh government handed the case to the CBI amid growing public attention and allegations raised by Twisha’s family.

The FIR, registered on May 25, 2026, invokes Sections 80(2), 85 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), along with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The case relates to allegations of dowry harassment, cruelty and dowry death.

Allegations of harassment after marriage

As per the FIR, Twisha Sharma married Samarth Singh on December 9, 2025. Her family has alleged that soon after the marriage, she was subjected to continuous mental and physical harassment over dowry demands.

The complaint submitted to investigators claims that Twisha repeatedly faced pressure and mistreatment from her husband and mother-in-law. Both Samarth Singh and Giribala Singh have been named as accused in the case.

The CBI has now begun examining allegations related to dowry harassment, criminal conspiracy and possible destruction of evidence. Officials have already collected documents, statements and forensic material gathered during the earlier police investigation.

Husband arrested after remaining absconding

The case gained further attention after Samarth Singh allegedly remained absconding for nearly 10 days following Twisha’s death. He was eventually arrested last week from Jabalpur after police tracked his movements.

Investigators are also examining why he avoided contact during the period and whether anyone helped him evade arrest.

Twisha, 33, was found hanging at her matrimonial home in Bhopal on May 12. While her in-laws claimed it was a case of suicide, her family accused the husband’s family of dowry harassment, mental torture and abetment to suicide.

The Singh family has denied all allegations and claimed that Twisha was struggling emotionally and had issues related to drug addiction. However, investigators are verifying those claims independently.

Injury marks raise fresh questions

The postmortem report confirmed that Twisha died due to “antemortem hanging”, indicating she was alive at the time of hanging. However, injury marks found on her body added another layer of suspicion to the case.

According to officials, some injuries appeared consistent with impact caused by a heavy object or physical assault. These findings prompted Twisha’s family to demand a second autopsy.

Last week, the Madhya Pradesh High Court ordered a fresh postmortem examination by a team of doctors from AIIMS Delhi after the family alleged lapses in the first autopsy conducted locally.

The second medical examination is expected to play a key role in determining whether there were signs of assault before death.

Supreme Court seeks restraint

The case also reached the Supreme Court, which recently took suo motu cognisance of the matter while expressing concern over allegations of institutional bias and procedural irregularities during the initial investigation.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, observed that both families were engaging with the media excessively while the investigation was still underway.

The court also advised the media to exercise restraint while reporting on developments related to the sensitive case.

Related Post