The Supreme Court of India has cancelled the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, who is the main accused in the murder of her husband, Raja Raghuvanshi, while on a honeymoon trip to Meghalaya. A bench comprising Justice M M Sundresh and Justice P B Varale set aside the bail order granted by the Meghalaya High Court and directed her to surrender before the concerned authorities within three weeks.
The Meghalaya government had appealed against her bail in the apex court. The prosecution argued that her freedom would impede the trial of the case. The judges agreed, noting that freeing the accused might jeopardize the evidence collection and the interrogation of the witnesses in the case.
Sonam was apprehended in June 2025 after her husband’s body was discovered in a gorge. Police suspected that she connived with hirelings for the conspiracy. They both hailed from Indore in Madhya Pradesh. The couple set out on an eastern trip right after their wedding and it turned out to be a holiday gone horribly wrong.
Meghalaya Trip of May 2025
Raja Raghuvanshi was a businessman and was a resident of Indore. In May 2025, he got married to Sonam and the duo decided to travel to Meghalaya for a honeymoon. The couple reached Sohra, an exotic tourist spot famous for deep gorges and beautiful sceneries. They went missing on May 23, 2025, and both were unreachable.
After days of searching, officers located the body of Raja on June 2, 2025 in a deep gorge close to Wei Sawdong. There were injuries on the body and police theorized attackers might have had to use sharp weapons like a machete to inflict damage before throwing the body off the gorge.
Sonam was still missing. Police trailed her and located her in an eatery on the roadside in Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh where she was apprehended on June 9, 2025. The police charge sheet claims that Sonam had connived with Raj Kushwaha, a local accomplice, along with three other people. The bunch had allegedly trailed the couple on their trek and executed the crime for monetary benefits.
A Typo Leads to Bail
Sonam was lodged in Shillong District Jail for a period of 10 months after being arrested. During her custody, she had moved three different bail applications. All of them were rejected, and the judges attributed her possible flight or influence of witnesses to the charges imposed on her.
She filed a fourth petition in April and this time, her defense lawyers highlighted a mistake in the arrest paperwork. While making the arrest memo police mentioned a fictitious section, section 403 of the statute instead of the murder charge section 103 of the BNS.
Her lawyers had argued that owing to a wrong section of law; police failed to notify her of the reason for her arrest in accordance with her constitutional right under Article 22. The trial court accepted the arguments and granted her bail in April. State of Meghalaya filed a plea against her bail in the HC and the HC upheld the bail order citing ‘total lack of judicial mind’ shown by the arresting officers given the writing of a section that was non-existent.
The State in Supreme Court
The government of Meghalaya had filed a plea in the SC for cancellation of bail. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who was representing Meghalaya, pointed out before the Supreme Court that section 403 was nothing but a typo in the writing. It was simple’a typo in a piece of paper’. Mehta further emphasized that the accused fully knew the charge that was levied upon her.
The state also criticized her for raising the issue on her fourth appeal in court when she was first produced before the magistrate on her arrival where no issues were raised, and so was the first threebail applications. The state said, ‘it is just an excuse created by the defence after realizing that a slip has been made’. She had approached the Supreme Court after the case had reached the argument stage on framing charges.
The State said that this has already led to a bad precedent where the accused has been given bail for a premeditated murder conspiracy due to a simple typo in a paper.
Top court findings by Justices M M Sundresh & P B Varale
The Supreme Court agrees with the State’s contentions and holds that a mere typo cannot defeat the intent of serious criminal accusations. A person aware of their arrest and all police investigations can’t plead for an invalid arrest based on a typing error. The bench further stated that she knew fully well that she was being arrested for murder; she had appeared for investigations and court dates and had never raised this issue until now.
They felt that the HC over-emphasized the technical issue and in doing so ignored the gravity of the crime and her imminent interference in the course of justice. The apex court reversed both the trial and the high court order.
The order to surrender has given her a three week window from the time of the order was delivered. It also contains a stipulation saying that a fresh bail application could be filed if the entire trial court procedure is not completed in six months and even then, it would not be the first rejection which should stop her from filing for another fresh case in court. With the framing of charges very close, it’s time for the trial to start in Meghalaya and the accused will have to surrender.
SC Cancels Sonam Raghuvanshi’s Bail in Meghalaya Honeymoon Murder Case
This news video provides direct coverage of the Supreme Court’s ruling ordering Sonam Raghuvanshi to surrender within three weeks in the Meghalaya honeymoon murder case.
SC cancels Sonam Raghuvanshi’s bail in Meghalaya honeymoon murder case
