Meghalaya police seek Supreme Court review of Sonam Raghuvanshi’s bail

Indore (Madhya Pradesh): Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime suspect in the Raja Raghuvanshi honeymoon murder case, has filed a counter-affidavit before the Supreme Court claiming innocence and alleging false implication.Responding to the Meghalaya government's challenge to her bail, Sonam contended that the prosecution's case rests entirely on circumstantial evidence and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt during the trial. She asserted that she cannot be presumed guilty based on allegations alone, adding that the investigation is complete, the chargesheet has been filed, and no further recoveries are needed from her.Filed through advocate-on-record Abhay Singh, the reply emphasises that Sonam is fully cooperating and not delaying the trial. Out of 90 listed witnesses, only four have been examined since Oct 28, 2025. Given that 86 witnesses remain, her reply notes that the trial will take considerable time to conclude.Sonam further submitted that she is complying with all bail conditions, residing within the trial court's jurisdiction in Shillong, and has not moved outside it. She assured the apex court that there is no possibility of her tampering with evidence or hampering the legal process.Indore Honour Killing: Mother, UPSC Aspirant Son Held For Murdering Daughter Going To Meet BF From Another Caste

New Delhi, July 9, 2026: The Supreme Court on Thursday indicated that it may consider referring to a larger bench the issue of whether grounds of arrest must mandatorily be provided in writing to a person at the time of arrest.A bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar was hearing a petition filed by the State of Meghalaya challenging the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime suspect in the May 2025 honeymoon murder case of her husband, Raja Raghuvanshi, Live Law reported.Conflicting Judgments ExaminedThe bench orally conveyed its inclination to Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, appearing for Meghalaya, and pointed out that different Supreme Court benches have delivered conflicting judgments on the issue.Justice Misra referred to the case of Pankaj Bansal, where the court held that the Enforcement Directorate must provide grounds of arrest in writing to an accused. He also referred to Dr Rajinder Rajan, where bail was granted to doctors in an NDPS case after grounds of arrest were not supplied in writing as required under the Mihir Shah decision, which held that written grounds of arrest were mandatory under all statutes.The judge also referred to the Vihaan Kumar judgment, where the court observed that while grounds of arrest must be communicated, they need not necessarily be provided in writing.“We will consider this matter at length. We will also decide if the matter requires to be referred to a larger bench. The problem is there are two judgments. One is Pankaj Bansal judgment, which was before Vihaan and Mihir Rajesh judgments. In Pankaj Bansal judgment, paragraph 45 requires the communication of grounds of arrest in writing. Now there is the judgment in Rajinder Rajan, then there is the Vihaan judgment, which says there is no requirement to give grounds in writing. This is the conflict which is arising from various coordinate bench judgments,” Justice Misra observed.State Defends Arrest MemoSolicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that, in the present case, written grounds of arrest had been supplied to Sonam Raghuvanshi. However, he said there was a typographical error in which Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) was wrongly mentioned as Section 403 BNS, which does not exist.The Solicitor General said the courts had granted bail only on the ground that the clerical mistake amounted to non-supply of grounds of arrest.Justice Misra pointed out that the gravamen of the charge must be disclosed and that merely mentioning sections was not enough.“It’s not about simply mentioning sections... you have to give the general background that you are involved in the murder of your husband,” the judge said.The court, while noting that the case was “serious”, relisted the matter for Tuesday and asked the State to file legible copies of the original documents supplied to the accused.Earlier Bail ProceedingsOn July 3, a bench led by Justice M. M. Sundresh refused to stay the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, even though it had prima facie expressed reservations over the High Court judgment that upheld her bail only on the basis of a typographical error in the arrest memo.Since Sonam had already been released, the court declined to stay the order but agreed to hear the petition filed by the State of Meghalaya challenging the bail order.On June 29, the High Court upheld the Trial Court's bail order, observing that the error showed that the arrest documents were prepared without due application of mind.The High Court further noted that even if mentioning the non-existent Section 403(1) BNS instead of Section 103(1) BNS was a typographical error, its repetition across multiple core documents could not be ignored.“The foundational basis for building up a case against the accused/respondent being found lacking, all other attempts to rectify the subsequent actions or process will have to fail,” the court observed.Honeymoon Murder CaseThe case came to light after the couple, who had married on May 12, 2025, went missing on May 23 while on their honeymoon in Meghalaya. They were last seen checking out of a homestay in Nongriat.A few days later, their rented scooter was found abandoned near Sohrarim. On June 2, around 10 days after their disappearance, Raja's body was found in a deep gorge near Weisawdong Falls in East Khasi Hills.Sonam, who had remained missing till June 8, was later found near a dhaba on the Varanasi-Ghazipur main road.Also Watch: 'Don’t Want To Be Too Harsh': Supreme Court Refuses To Stay Sonam Raghuvanshi's Bail The Meghalaya Police later stated that Sonam, along with 21-year-old Raj Kushwaha, was being considered one of the prime suspects in Raja's murder. The State Police have already filed a more than 700-page chargesheet, claiming that the murder was premeditated by Sonam and Kushwaha.To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/

Indore (Madhya Pradesh): Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in Indore businessman and husband Raja Raghuvanshi's murder, filed a counter-affidavit in the Supreme Court, reasserting her innocence. Sonam, in the affidavit, mentioned that she was implicated on false charges of killing her husband Raja during their honeymoon in Meghalaya and that she has been consistently cooperating with the investigation and the trial.Next hearing on July 14The Supreme Court bench of Justice Manoj Mishra and Justice Chandrashekhar heard the case on Thursday. The next hearing has been listed for July 14, 2026.'We don't want to be harsh': SC refuses to stay Sonam's bailEarlier this week on July 3, the Supreme Court had refused to cancel the bail granted to her, stating that it was already granted and the court does not want to interfere with that.A bench of justices MM Sundresh and Sheel Nagu heard the matter.Solicitor General Tushar Mehta even mentioned the Pune Ketan Agarwal murder, where fiancé Siya Goyal is the prime accused, emphasising that such incidents have increased after the Raja Raghuvanshi murder case. The apex court said, "Prima facie, we were inclined to stay, but for the fact that she has been released already, we don’t want to be too harsh."'Don’t Want To Be Too Harsh': Supreme Court Refuses To Stay Sonam Raghuvanshi's Bail The timelineIt was during May 2025 when the newlyweds Raja Raghuvanshi and Sonam Raghuvanshi went for their honeymoon to the Northeast. They first sought blessings at Kamakhya Temple in Assam, then went to tour Meghalaya. It was on May 24 when the couple lost contact with the family.During the search, Meghalaya police recovered Raja's body from a gorge near Shillong on June 2. While the search for Sonam was still on. A week later, Sonam was found near a dhaba at Ghazipur, near the UP border.Last month, Shillong Court had given bail to Sonam. Following which, the Meghalaya government approached the Meghalaya High Court. The high court, too, upheld Shillong's court order, prompting Raja's family to approach the Supreme Court.Raja Raghuvanshi Murder: Sonam Raghuvanshi Denies Fleeing To Nepal Rumours, Says She Is Staying In Shillong -- VIDEO

Meghalaya honeymoon murder case: Supreme Court upholds the High court's decision to grant bail

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to stay the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, an accused in the murder of her husband Raja Raghuvanshi, but expressed prima facie reservations over the Meghalaya High Court's reasoning. The matter will now be heard on 9 July.

New Delhi: In a relief to Sonam Raghuvanshi, who is accused of murdering her husband, Raja Raghuvanshi, during their honeymoon in Meghalaya last year, the Supreme Court on Friday refused to cancel the bail granted to her. A bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Sheel Nagu heard the matter.During the hearing, the top court noted that the accused had already been released from jail and was currently in Shillong in compliance with the bail conditions imposed by the trial court, reported The Times of India.Earlier, on June 29, the Meghalaya High Court upheld a Shillong court's April order granting bail to Sonam, prompting the state government to challenge the order.Raja Raghuvanshi Murder: Meghalaya Court Challenges Sonam Raghuvanshi's Bail In Supreme Court; Urgent Hearing On July 2The apex court, during the hearing, had primarily said it would cancel the bail but later refused to do so, noting she had already been released from jail. "If she is released already, we would not want to interfere," the court said.Solicitor General Tushar Mehta also referred to the Pune murder case of Ketan Agarwal during the hearing.“Recently, a wife killed her husband because he was wearing a wig," Mehta submitted, referring to the Siya-Ketan case. He further argued that such incidents had increased after the present case.The bench concluded by observing, “Prima facie, we were inclined to stay, but for the fact that she has been released already, we don’t want to be too harsh."The bench said it would first observe the progress of the trial and also issued a notice to Sonam.Background of the caseThe case dates back to May 2025, when newlyweds Raja and Sonam Raghuvanshi disappeared during their honeymoon in Meghalaya. They were last seen after checking out of a homestay in Nongriat. Days later, their rented scooter was found abandoned, and on June 2, Raja's body was recovered from a deep gorge near Weisawdong Falls in East Khasi Hills.