The Supreme Court of India took suo motu cognisance of the death of Twisha Sharma and ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation to lead the probe [1].
This judicial intervention follows allegations of procedural discrepancies and institutional bias regarding the unnatural death of the young woman at her matrimonial home in Madhya Pradesh [1]. The court's decision to bypass state-level investigators suggests a lack of confidence in the initial handling of the case.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant directed that the CBI take over the investigation within one day [1]. The court said it was pained over the death case [1]. To ensure forensic accuracy, the court also ordered a second post-mortem to be conducted by a team from the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) [2].
Advocate Anurag Srivastav, representing the family, said the family is pleased with the apex court's intervention, the completion of the second post-mortem by an AIIMS team, and the Madhya Pradesh government's recommendation for a CBI probe [2].
The case originally drew attention due to the circumstances surrounding Sharma's death in Madhya Pradesh. The state government subsequently recommended that the federal agency take over the investigation to ensure a transparent process [1].
The CBI is expected to coordinate with AIIMS to review the findings of the second autopsy as part of the wider investigation into the cause of death [2].
“The Supreme Court is pained over the death case and has directed that the CBI take over the probe within a day.”
The Supreme Court's decision to take suo motu cognisance—acting on its own motion—indicates a high level of judicial concern regarding the integrity of the initial investigation. By mandating a second post-mortem by AIIMS and a federal probe by the CBI, the court is attempting to eliminate potential local influence or bias that often plagues high-profile unnatural death cases in state jurisdictions.
