Photo Courtesy: nenews
Shillong: The Supreme Court canceled Sonam Raghuvanshi’s bail on July 23. She stands accused of murdering her husband, Raja Raghuvanshi, during their 2025 honeymoon in Meghalaya. Justices M.M. Sundresh and P.B. Varale directed her to surrender to police within three weeks.
The couple traveled to Sohra on May 23, 2025. Raja went missing. His body turned up in a deep gorge on June 2. Police claim Sonam conspired with her alleged lover and three hired killers to murder the Indore businessman for money. She was arrested on June 9, 2025, and held for over 10 months in Shillong before securing bail.
The state government challenged the Meghalaya High Court order that granted her release. That court cited a clerical error in the arrest memo, which incorrectly listed Section 403(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita instead of the murder charge under Section 103(1). The Supreme Court dismissed this technicality. The bench noted that Sonam had acknowledged the grounds of arrest before a magistrate. The court stated: "The respondent was served with the grounds of arrest. There is a distinction between non-service of the grounds of arrest and the adequacy of the reasons communicated. The records show that the respondent acknowledged receipt of the documents and expressed satisfaction before the magistrate. Therefore, we find no reason to examine the validity of the arrest."
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta represented Meghalaya. He countered defense claims that Sonam surrendered voluntarily rather than being arrested in Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh. Defense counsel argued she followed all bail conditions and noted only four of 94 prosecution witnesses have testified. The Supreme Court rejected these arguments because previous bail pleas were denied on their merits.
If the trial fails to wrap up within six months, Sonam can file for a new bail application. Raja’s father, Ashok Raghuvanshi, called for the death penalty. His mother, Uma, and brother, Vipin, expressed relief, citing fears of evidence tampering. During the proceedings, the bench discussed modern social pressures. Justice Sundresh noted the restlessness of the younger generation. The trial continues.
Comments