A Bhopal court on Wednesday rejected a plea seeking a second postmortem of actress and model Twisha Sharma, whose death under suspicious circumstances has triggered widespread public attention in Madhya Pradesh. The court, however, directed police to preserve the body in a mortuary facility capable of preventing decomposition for an extended period.

Meanwhile, the Madhya Pradesh government has decided to write to the Centre seeking a CBI investigation into the case. Chief Minister Dr. Mohan Yadav also assured Twisha Sharma’s family that the state would support further legal proceedings, including arrangements to shift the body to AIIMS Delhi if ordered by the court.

Court Rejects Second Postmortem

The order was passed by Judge Anudita Gupta’s court in Bhopal after hearing arguments related to the demand for a second postmortem examination outside the state. In its observation, the court stated that allowing a second postmortem in another state did not fall within its jurisdiction. The court also noted that the first postmortem conducted at AIIMS Bhopal followed due procedure and there was no evidence on record indicating collusion between doctors and the accused. The court said suspicion alone could not justify ordering another postmortem examination at this stage.

Body Preservation Ordered

While rejecting the plea, the court instructed the Katara Hills police station SHO to ensure proper preservation of the body. The order highlighted concerns regarding the existing mortuary facility at AIIMS Bhopal, where the body is reportedly being stored at minus 4 degrees Celsius, allowing preservation for only four to five days. The court observed that long-term preservation would require storage at nearly minus 80 degrees Celsius to prevent decomposition. Twisha Sharma’s family has now indicated that they will approach the Madhya Pradesh High Court seeking permission for a second postmortem at AIIMS Delhi.

CM Assures Family Support

Twisha Sharma’s father Navnidhi Sharma met Chief Minister Dr. Mohan Yadav in Bhopal along with a group of retired armed forces personnel. During the meeting, the Chief Minister reportedly assured the family of all possible assistance from the state government. He also stated that the government would facilitate transportation of the body to Delhi if the High Court orders a second postmortem. The state government additionally plans to request a CBI investigation into the case through an official communication to the Centre.

Bail Cancellation Plea Planned

The Madhya Pradesh government is also expected to file an application seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to Twisha Sharma’s mother-in-law, retired judge Giribala Singh. Twisha’s family has accused Giribala Singh and husband Samarth Singh of dowry harassment and linked them to the actress’s death. The family has separately written to Governor Mangubhai Patel demanding removal of Giribala Singh from her current position in the district consumer forum, arguing that an accused in a dowry death case should not continue in office.

Husband Still Absconding

Bhopal Police has issued a lookout notice against Twisha Sharma’s husband Samarth Singh, who remains absconding. Police Commissioner Sanjay Singh said a Special Investigation Team is probing the matter from every possible angle and efforts to trace the accused are ongoing. Authorities have also increased the reward for information leading to Samarth Singh’s arrest from Rs 10,000 to Rs 30,000. The court has directed Samarth Singh to appear before it on May 23 and present his side in the matter.

Questions Over Investigation

The case has sparked debate over forensic procedures and handling of evidence during the initial postmortem process. According to information emerging from the investigation, the belt allegedly used in the hanging incident was not brought to AIIMS Bhopal during the postmortem examination. As a result, forensic experts could not scientifically compare the ligature marks on Twisha’s neck with the alleged object used. Police officials have maintained that preliminary findings indicate suicide and that the neck injuries appear consistent with hanging. However, Twisha Sharma’s family has pointed to injury marks found on her body and continues to allege dowry harassment and foul play.

National Attention On Case

The National Commission for Women has taken suo motu cognisance of the matter and sought an Action Taken Report from the Madhya Pradesh government within seven days. The commission has asked officials to provide details regarding FIR provisions, CCTV footage, forensic evidence, call records and measures taken to ensure safety of the family. Rajya Sabha MP Vivek Tankha has also written to Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Chief Minister Dr. Mohan Yadav seeking a CBI probe into the actress’s death. Retired armed forces personnel additionally organised a motorcycle rally in Bhopal demanding an impartial investigation into the Twisha Sharma death case.

'Paisa Interest Litigation': SC slams misuse of PILs in Sabarimala hearing

The Supreme Court has questioned the motives of the Indian Young Lawyers Association’s 2006 petition, noting that PILs are increasingly becoming tools for personal gain.

In a stinging critique of the current judicial landscape, a nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on Tuesday observed that Public Interest Litigations (PILs) have largely devolved into "Paisa Interest Litigation" or "Publicity Interest Litigation." The bench, which is currently deliberating on critical questions surrounding religious freedom, expressed serious reservations about how such petitions are being leveraged in the modern era.

The verbal observations came during the ongoing hearing of the Sabarimala temple matter, which has triggered a broader debate on the intersection of individual rights and centuries-old religious traditions.

Bench questions 2006 petition motive

The top court’s scrutiny was specifically directed at the Indian Young Lawyers Association, which had filed the original petition in 2006 challenging the age-old ban on the entry of women aged 10 to 50 into the Sabarimala Ayyappa Temple in Kerala. Justice Surya Kant, part of the bench, noted that the association seemed to have little to do with the actual devotees or the ground reality of the shrine at the time.

"It has become more of a Private Interest Litigation, Publicity Interest Litigation, and now Money Interest Litigation," the bench remarked, highlighting a growing trend where litigations are filed based on newspaper reports rather than substantive personal or community injury.

Concerns over 'proxy' litigation

Sources familiar with the proceedings said the court expressed concern over whether the original petitioners were truly "aggrieved parties." The bench noted that the 2006 PIL was largely constructed around media reports. The judges suggested that organizations should perhaps focus more on the welfare of their own members rather than seeking judicial intervention in complex religious customs where they may not have a direct stake.

This line of questioning shifts the focus back to the locus standi—the right to bring a lawsuit to court—which has been a point of contention in the Sabarimala case for years.

The Sabarimala legal timeline

To understand the weight of these remarks, one must look back at the 2018 verdict. A five-judge bench, in a 4:1 majority, had previously lifted the ban on women of menstruating age, calling the practice unconstitutional. However, that decision led to a massive wave of review petitions and sparked a nationwide debate on whether the court should interfere in "essential religious practices."

The current nine-judge bench was subsequently formed to address larger issues, including whether a person who does not belong to a particular religion can challenge its practices through a PIL.

Focus on religious freedom

The court is currently dealing with a massive bundle of petitions that go beyond just Sabarimala. The scope has expanded to include the entry of women into mosques, the practice of female genital mutilation in the Dawoodi Bohra community, and the rights of Parsi women married outside their faith.

Legal experts suggest that the court’s latest comments on "Paisa Interest Litigation" signal a stricter approach toward entertaining PILs in the future. The bench indicated that while the doors of the court are open to the marginalized, they should not be used as a platform for political or financial maneuvering.

Impact on future filings

The proceedings on Tuesday have sent a clear message to the legal fraternity. Local authorities and legal observers in the capital believe this could lead to a tightening of the rules governing PIL admissions.

The hearing is expected to continue through the week, with the bench likely to further define the boundaries of judicial overreach in matters of faith. For now, the "paisa interest" remark stands as a stern warning against the commercialization of the judicial process.

Bollywood actress Celina Jaitly has received significant relief in her long-running legal struggle for her brother, Retired Major Vikrant Jaitly, who has been in UAE custody since September 2024. In a key development, the Delhi High Court has directed the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) to facilitate legal assistance and ensure the safety of the former Indian Army officer.

The order comes after nearly 16 months of detention, during which Celina repeatedly raised concerns about lack of communication and legal access for her brother. The latest court intervention marks a turning point in the Celina Jaitly brother UAE custody case, which has drawn attention to the challenges faced by Indian citizens detained abroad.

Delhi High Court Steps In for Legal and Diplomatic Support

During a hearing held on Tuesday, the Delhi High Court instructed the Ministry of External Affairs to urgently coordinate legal support for Major Vikrant Jaitly and ensure his well-being while in UAE custody. The court emphasised the need for structured diplomatic and legal intervention, especially given the prolonged detention.

Celina Jaitly confirmed the development through a post on her official social media account, calling it a “big step to protect the rights of a soldier.” She shared that, after months of effort, legal arrangements for her brother have finally been put in place.

UAE Law Firm Appointed to Handle the Case

Following the court’s directive, a prominent UAE-based legal firm, Khalid Almarri & Partners Advocates, has been engaged to represent Major Vikrant Jaitly. Notably, the firm has agreed to handle the case pro bono, working to protect his rights under international law.

Legal experts say this move is crucial, as cases involving national security laws in foreign jurisdictions often require local legal expertise and diplomatic coordination.

Celina Jaitly Thanks MEA for Support

Expressing gratitude, Celina Jaitly publicly thanked the Ministry of External Affairs for its cooperation. She stated that she is confident her brother will return home safely, highlighting his years of service to the nation.

Her statements have resonated widely, sparking conversations around the legal protections available to Indian citizens detained overseas.

Background: 16 Months of Detention in UAE

Major Vikrant Jaitly retired from the Indian Army and had been living in Dubai since 2016. In September 2024, he was taken into custody by UAE security agencies in connection with a national security-related case. Since then, his family claims there has been little to no direct communication.

Unable to intervene legally from India, Celina eventually approached the Delhi High Court, seeking MEA assistance after exhausting all other options.

Why This Case Matters Now

The Celina Jaitly brother UAE custody case highlights the importance of diplomatic channels, legal access, and consular support for Indians abroad. As global mobility increases, such cases underline the role of the government in safeguarding citizens’ rights beyond national borders.

With legal help now in place, the coming weeks are expected to be critical in determining the next steps in the case.