Samarth Singh, the husband of model and actor Twisha Sharma, was taken into police custody after he reached the Jabalpur district court on Friday “to surrender” – after absconding for 10 days in a dowry death case filed against him and his mother.His advocate, Jaideep Kaurav, said, “He appeared before the Jabalpur District Court to surrender, but the court was not available. After that, the Jabalpur police took his custody and handed him over to the Bhopal police. I don’t have any information about the commotion at the court. There are chances that the police will present him in the Bhopal court tomorrow.”Bhopal Commissioner of Police Sanjay Kumar said, “Yes, he has been taken into custody, and our police team is handling this entire process. He will be questioned as part of the ongoing investigation, and necessary seizures will be carried out. He will be produced in court tomorrow.”Also Read | Twisha Sharma death: Bhopal court dismisses plea seeking second postmortem, CM says will write to CBI for probeSamarth had evaded the police for 10 days, and a reward of Rs 10,000 for information leading to his arrest was later increased to Rs 30,000.The Bhopal-based lawyer had entered Jabalpur court wearing a mask, cap and sunglasses. Meanwhile, the Bar Council of India’s chairman, Manan Kumar Mishra, said that Samarth’s license had been suspended, given the “seriousness of the case”.Meanwhile, Justice Avanindra Kumar Singh of the Madhya Pradesh High Court heard a batch of connected matters arising out of Twisha’s death, including pleas seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to her mother-in-law, Giribala Singh, as well as her family’s request for a second postmortem.The court also heard preliminary submissions on Twisha’s father’s plea seeking a second postmortem of his daughter at AIIMS Delhi. During the proceedings, the state indicated that it would not oppose a second postmortem.Story continues below this adAlso Read | Belt used in Twisha Sharma hanging not shown to doctors during autopsy, AIIMS report revealsAt the same time, the court also took up petitions filed both by Twisha’s father and the state government seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to Giribala Singh. Both petitions allege that the retired judicial officer tampered with evidence, leaked selective CCTV footage, failed to cooperate with investigators and influenced the investigation.Addressing reporters after the hearing in Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh Advocate General Prashant Singh said the High Court directed the Director of AIIMS Delhi to constitute a medical board for conducting the second postmortem and ordered that logistical support be arranged immediately thereafter.Meanwhile, in its petition filed before the High Court, the state government alleged that the sessions court granted anticipatory bail to Giribala Singh “in a very mechanical manner without going through the prosecution evidence,” despite what it described as “crystal clear allegations” emerging from WhatsApp chats between Twisha Sharma and her parents.Also Read | Twisha Singh’s husband lands in court to surrender as state ramps up pressureOne of the strongest allegations made by the state concerns the handling and public circulation of CCTV footage from the house where Twisha was found dead. According to the petition, police had already seized the CCTV footage from the residence on May 13 as part of the investigation.Story continues below this adHowever, the government alleged that Giribala Singh had separately retained copies of the footage and later strategically leaked “selected small clips” on social media “in a manner to tamper prosecution evidence and obstruct investigation.”Also Read | How we talk about Twisha Sharma says a lot about what’s wrong with usAccording to the state, the investigating officer issued notices to Giribala Singh on May 13 and May 14 directing her to cooperate in the investigation, but “she did not turn up.” Even after securing anticipatory bail, the state alleged, she continued to evade investigators.The petition states that a notice sent on WhatsApp on May 20 seeking her appearance for questioning went unanswered despite being seen. It further alleges that when a police officer visited her residence on May 21, her domestic help informed police that she was unavailable and refused to accept the notice.“Thus, it is apparent that she is not cooperating in the investigation and is blatantly violating the terms and conditions of the order of grant of anticipatory bail,” the government argued, adding that she was “deliberately avoiding interrogation and gives evasive replies.”