Twisha's ghost: The price of tolerance in modern India

By Jharna Pathak* 

The death of Twisha Sharma on May 12, 2026, in her marital home in Bhopal, just five months into her marriage, is not an isolated incident of domestic abuse. She held an MBA degree, had worked as a model and actor, and was a corporate employee. Her husband is a practising lawyer, while her mother-in-law is a retired district judge. Given such an elite background and other markers of a modern, independent, and liberated woman, she should have been safe—until she wasn't.

Initially, the police conducted a shoddy investigation, but in view of the legal background of the in-laws and the undue influence they could exert, the Supreme Court of India has now taken suo motu cognisance of the matter. Twisha's killing is not merely a crime but a systemic problem. It reflects the mindset of a society where women must die rather than seek divorce or separation. The fundamental question is: why are even educated women unable to walk out of such marriages?

The Structural Paradox in Contemporary Marriage

Feminist theorists have identified Twisha's case as a structural paradox. While the process of partner selection has evolved into a practice of choosing mates through the internet and other forms of digital communication, marriage as an institution remains coercive and hierarchical. A woman is granted autonomy only as long as it does not conflict with the wishes of her marital family.

After her marriage, Twisha's in-laws reportedly asked her to quit her job and delete all the pictures she had taken as a model, thereby erasing her pre-marriage identity from the glamorous profession of modelling and films. Once she became financially dependent on her in-laws, they labelled her as "useless" and burdensome. Coupled with the extravagant amount of money spent on the wedding, the transfer of pre-marriage savings, or the liquidation of financial resources for the benefit of the newly married couple, the expectations placed on the newlywed bride are crushed, while those of her loved ones and society at large weigh heavily on her.

This trend shows that dowry has not been abandoned but has taken on new forms. Nowadays, dowry may not require the payment of money or the gift of a car or flat, but it can take the form of a demand for an opulent wedding ceremony. Parents of the bride try to impress everyone in their desire to uphold the "status" of the family their daughter is marrying into. Though this may impose a significant financial burden, they do so in the hope that it will guarantee fair treatment for their daughter. Such displays almost inevitably elicit more demands and assume the form of extortion. Even after such fanfare, the tough question remains: how useful is education when a woman is expected to give up her profession and savings post-marriage?

Red Flags and the Advice to Tolerate and Endure

On review, Twisha's case is riddled with red flags. Family and society normalised each one. Social realities can imprison an educated and financially independent woman in an abusive marriage. Her husband's short temper was dismissed as just a passing phase. Her resignation was considered acceptable and normal because that is what girls are expected to do when they get married. Her complaints about physical and verbal abuse at her marital home were met with the typical Indian parental advice: that she should be patient, remain calm, speak politely to her mother-in-law with respect, endure, and negotiate. Even later, after the intensity of violence increased, aspersions were cast on her integrity, and the atmosphere became too toxic and hostile, yet her own family did not see the need to bring her back home. Nor could she muster the courage to leave on her own.

This is not an isolated example where counsel for forbearance and tolerance has failed. In my study conducted among 250 survivors of domestic violence in Gujarat in 2019–20, close to 87 per cent had sought support from their parents. Of these, almost half of the parents had initially advised their daughters to return to their marital homes. Parents of such women also believed in the stereotype of the 'good wife' and did not understand the plight of their daughters. They were also worried that a married daughter in their house would affect the marriage prospects of a younger sibling, so returning to the marital home took precedence over her immediate safety. Hence, they felt compelled to dispense the stereotypical advice to their daughters in distress: to be patient, tolerant, and silent.

Girls are socialised into accepting that once married, they will leave their natal home, give up work, and live with their husband and in-laws. These circumstances are never presented as a choice; rather, they are portrayed as an inevitable reality. Women are expected to endure and sacrifice. If a woman resists violence, others doubt her credibility and humiliate her. Divorce is seen as an act of selfishness leading to the destruction of families. This has conditioned women to such an extent that divorce is not even considered an option. Thus, even though a woman may be suffering in marriage, she is told that she will earn respect from her husband and mother-in-law and that her life will gradually become easier if she compromises for the time being. Moreover, society labels it a social shame when a woman chooses to walk out of an abusive relationship.

Ultimately, instead of understanding and acknowledging her distress, family and society treat it as a sign of bad behaviour or perhaps even a mental disorder.

How much abuse must a woman suffer before her parents lend a helping hand to rescue her from an abusive relationship?

What Needs to Change

Legal interventions are necessary but not sufficient to solve this problem of social conditioning. The problem is not only institutional but also cultural. Families must be comforting and sheltering rather than places of pressure dictated by social mores. What is needed now is a survivor-centred support system in which the daughter's safety comes first, before the sanctity of the family. The priority should be a woman's safety above everything else. Families must not only allow their daughters back home but also welcome them with open arms when they divorce. Education must enable both careers and a woman's ability to make independent decisions without fear or shame.

Little emphasis should be placed on trying to save every possible marriage, regardless of what happens to a woman in that relationship. The focus should be on the woman's well-being above everything else. Gender sensitisation of the community, including the police and the judiciary, is essential. Twisha Sharma's death is not an individual case but a sign that our efforts towards 'Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao' have failed to produce results. Without structural changes, we will continue to sacrifice many Twishas. The time to act is now.

---

*In-charge and Faculty Member at Gujarat Institute of Development Research (GIDR) and Secretary, Ahmedabad Women's Action Group (AWAG), Ahmedabad, Gujarat