Honeymoon murder case: Meghalaya government moves Supreme Court over Sonam Raghuvanshi’s bail
The Meghalaya government has moved the Supreme Court to challenge the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime suspect in her husband's honeymoon murder. Bail was previously upheld due to severe police paperwork blunders during her arrest
New Delhi: The Meghalaya government on Thursday moved the Supreme Court challenging the Meghalaya High Court’s order upholding the grant of bail to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in the sensational Raja Raghuvanshi honeymoon murder case.
The matter was mentioned before a Bench led by Justice M.M. Sundresh, with Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Meghalaya government, seeking an urgent hearing.
SG Mehta submitted that bail was granted solely on the ground that the grounds of arrest were not fully supplied to the accused at the time of her arrest.
Expressing apprehension that the accused may abscond, the Solicitor General sought urgent listing of the state government’s Special Leave Petition (SLP).
After hearing the submissions, Justice Sundresh agreed to list the matter for an early hearing.
On June 29, the Meghalaya High Court had upheld a Shillong court’s order granting bail to Sonam Raghuvanshi, dismissing the state government’s appeal against the lower court’s decision.
A single-judge Bench of Justice W. Diengdoh had rejected the prosecution’s challenge to the April 2026 order of the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Shillong, which granted bail to Sonam after finding serious procedural lapses in her arrest.
The Shillong court had granted bail on the ground that the investigating officers failed to properly communicate the grounds of her arrest, thereby prejudicing her defence.
The court had observed that all arrest-related documents, including the arrest memo, checklist for justification of arrest, inspection memo, intimation of rights and extracts of the case diary, incorrectly mentioned Section 403(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) instead of Section 103(1), which deals with the offence of murder.
Rejecting the prosecution’s contention that the error was merely typographical, the lower court had held that the same mistake appeared consistently across all documents and that Sonam was never formally informed that she had been arrested for the offence of murder.
The Meghalaya government had challenged the order before the High Court, contending that the procedural lapse had caused no actual prejudice to the accused.
Appearing for the state government, Advocate General Amit Kumar had argued that Sonam was fully aware of the murder charge as she had signed the arrest documents, appeared before the magistrate during remand proceedings and had been represented by legal counsel from the outset.
The Meghalaya government had also relied on a Supreme Court judgment to argue that such procedural irregularities are curable defects in the absence of demonstrable prejudice.
However, the High Court declined to interfere with the Shillong court’s order, allowing Sonam to continue on bail.
The case relates to the murder of Indore-based businessman Raja Raghuvanshi, who had travelled to Meghalaya with his wife Sonam for their honeymoon shortly after their marriage in May 2025.
The couple went missing during their visit to Sohra (Cherrapunji), triggering a massive search operation.
Raja’s body was later recovered from a deep gorge near Weisawdong Falls with multiple injuries, while Sonam remained untraceable for several days.
Subsequent investigations by the Meghalaya Police alleged that Sonam had conspired with her alleged lover and hired assailants to eliminate Raja during the honeymoon.
She was later traced and arrested, while several other accused were also apprehended from different states.
After the investigation was completed, the police filed a chargesheet before the competent court, and the trial proceedings are currently underway.
