Meghalaya Murder Case: Applicability of BNS Section 103 for Murder Punishment

Raja and Sonam Raghuvanshi went missing on May 23, 2025. They were on their honeymoon at Wei Sawdong Falls in Cherrapunji, Meghalaya. They had recently been married. A week later, Raja’s body was located in a remote canyon. There were goods gone from the body, and his neck had been slit.

At first, people assumed the murder was an accident or a probable kidnapping. But as more information came in, it became evident that the death was the product of a planned murder. A Special Investigation Team (SIT) set up by the Meghalaya Police found a trail of digital evidence and eyewitness accounts. These results suggest that Sonam planned the crime by hiring contract killers, who she allegedly contacted through a close acquaintance to carry out the killing.

The police had already arrested three individuals from Madhya Pradesh and were still looking for a fourth suspect when Sonam handed herself in to the police in Uttar Pradesh at the beginning of June.

The new criminal code, which is part of the Bharatiya Nyāya Saṃhitā, 2023, comes into sharp focus because of what happened in the Raghuvanshi case. Section 103, which sets the punishment for murder, is made very explicit.

The BNS took several parts of the Indian Penal Code that were passed during the colonial era and combined and updated them to make new murder regulations. According to Section 103(1), a person who is found guilty of murder can be sentenced to death, life in prison, or a fine.

If a gang of five or more people work together to kill someone because of their race, caste, gender, or personal beliefs, they will face the same harsh penalties as in paragraph (2). This two-part structure shows that the lawmaker wants to deal with both personal and community culpability, with harsher sanctions for murders that are motivated by hate or that involve a lot of people.

Prosecutors must show that Sonam, the main suspect in Raghuvanshi’s murder, and her hired helpers really did want to kill Raja. Section 103(1) talks about premeditation and malice aforethought. These are things that were part of prior law but are now specified under the BNS.

However, the fact that there are several conspirators makes the case more serious and may make the court think about the crime as a whole when deciding on aggravating factors. This is true even though Section 103(2) says that a gang must have at least five offenders.

Depending on whether the crime is seen as a single murder or a murder committed by a group of persons working together, the person might be charged with either life in prison or the death sentence.

Because of the BNS’s procedural safeguards, every death sentence must go through a strict judicial process before it can be carried out. If the death sentence is given, there will be a way to automatically appeal to the High Court.

The trial will take place in a sessions court. Judges must write down the unusual grounds for such a sentence, which is a sign of the legal protections against the arbitrary use of the death penalty. Life imprisonment, on the other hand, means being locked up for the rest of the convict’s life.

The BNS does allow for remissions under specific conditions, which is a detail that was kept from the IPC system but is now explained again in the new code.

For More Updates & Regular notes, Join Our WhatsApp group (https://chat.whatsapp.com/DkucckgAEJbCtXwXr2yIt0) and Telegram Group ( https://t.me/legalmaestroeducators )

The Raghuvanshi case shows not just how the SIT investigates cases under the new rules, but also how the sentencing process works. Changes to the Criminal Procedure Code that are related to the BNS make it easier to set up expert teams.

These changes also allow for more forensic work and set rules for how to safeguard witnesses. To find out where payments were sent to suspects in Indore and Sagar, the Meghalaya government employed satellite pictures, cell phone data, and bank records.

This technology-driven investigation shows how important it is for states to work together quickly to break up criminal networks that operate across state lines. This is an example of the current investigative mindset that the BNS supports.

Sonam’s defense attorney could try to get rid of the evidence that connects her to the people who killed her. They can say that they weren’t directly involved in the killing that happened. On the other hand, Section 103 explicitly includes anyone who “abett” or “conspire” to kill, which shows a broad view of guilt that includes people who plan the crime behind the scenes.

The new rule says that people who hire or help murders will face the same punishments as the killers themselves. This keeps the abetment and conspiracy doctrines strong.

The killing of Raghuvanshi has also brought up the question of whether the death penalty is legal in India. People who want to improve the criminal justice system say that even the worst offenses can get life sentences.

This is because the death penalty is becoming less common across the world. However, the public outrage at the breach of trust in marriage and the brutal behavior may affect the prosecution’s suggestions to provide the worst punishment allowed under Section 103.

In the end, it will be up to the courts to decide, together with the law, what to do. The High Court’s review will be an important check on any judgment that gives the death sentence.

Finally, it’s important to point out that the murder of Raja Raghuvanshi in Meghalaya is seen as one of the first big tests of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyāya Saṃhitā, 2023. This makes the code’s strict commitment to punishing murder, whether it is done by one person or a gang, and its new procedures for making sure justice is done quickly, stand out even more.

The case will not only set a precedent for how Section 103 is used, but it will also set a precedent for how India’s new criminal justice system handles difficult, multi-actor violent crimes while the judicial system is still working. The finding will have a big effect on how people think about justice during the BNS period, both in court and in public discourse.