The Supreme Court scheduled for July 21 the Meghalaya government’s plea challenging bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in the alleged murder of her husband, Raja Raghuvanshi, during their honeymoon in Meghalaya.
The Supreme Court listed for hearing on July 21 the Meghalaya government’s plea challenging the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in the alleged murder of her husband Raja Raghuvanshi during their honeymoon.
The Bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice P.B. Varale adjourned the matter to the next Tuesday.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the State, urged that the case be taken up either at the end of the board or at 2 p.m.
He told the Bench that the matter involves the question of non-supply of the grounds of arrest and requires final adjudication.
ALSO READ: Raja Raghuvanshi’s Family Apologises to Meghalaya Govt, Slams Sonam for Defaming State
Justice Sundresh asked,
“What is this?”
Mehta responded,
“This is the matter where grounds of arrest were not supplied.”
After being reminded of the case, Justice Sundresh remarked,
“Oh! That lady.”
Mehta replied,
“Yes, she killed her husband in the honeymoon. The main matter is coming up. This has to be finally disposed of.”
Taking note of the submission, the Bench directed that Meghalaya’s plea challenging Sonam Raghuvanshi’s bail be listed for hearing on July 21.
Earlier, Sonam Raghuvanshi had told the Supreme Court that she had been falsely implicated and that the prosecution case rests on circumstantial evidence.
In her response to the State of Meghalaya’s challenge to the High Court order that upheld her bail, she submitted that during trial the prosecution must establish the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. She also argued that mere allegations, particularly in a circumstantial-evidence case, do not by themselves establish the offence.
Earlier, the Supreme Court had said it would take up the bail-challenge matter on July 14, 2026. A Bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Shree Chandrashekhar directed that written submissions be filed by then so the issue could be heard in detail.
The Bench observed that the case is serious and stated,
“We will consider this matter at length and see if the matter is to be referred to a larger bench..”
The Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed before the Supreme Court challenges the High Court judgment dated June 29, 2026, in which the High Court of Meghalaya at Shillong dismissed the State’s challenge and refused to interfere with a trial court order granting bail on a technical ground.
According to the petition, the trial court granted bail primarily because one of the seven documents prepared at the time of Sonam’s arrest contained a typographical error referring to Section 403 BNS instead of Section 103 BNS, the provision under which she is charged with murder.
The State contends that the other six documents prepared contemporaneously, all signed by Sonam, correctly recorded the grounds of arrest. It further says she did not raise the issue in her first three bail applications.
The case relates to the disappearance and killing of Raja Raghuvanshi, whose body was reportedly recovered from a gorge near Sohra on June 2, 2025, about ten days after he went missing during his honeymoon with Sonam. Investigators allege the murder was planned in advance before the couple left Indore, involving a conspiracy with Sonam’s associate Raj Kushwaha and three other men who allegedly trekked alongside the couple before the attack near Wei Sawdong.
The allegations state that Raja was attacked with machetes and his body was thrown into a deep gorge.
Sonam was arrested in Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh, on June 9, 2025, after alleged attempts to stage a plan to return with a false kidnapping narrative. The petition states that at the time of arrest, she signed five separate documents, including the memorandum of arrest and an intimation of rights, which indicated that she had been informed about the reasons for her arrest.
It adds that a magistrate in Sohra who examined her later also recorded that she confirmed her awareness of the grounds.
The State notes that Sonam filed four bail applications within a year. It says her first three applications were rejected after courts found, among other things, a prima facie case against her, a flight risk, and the likelihood of influencing witnesses. It was only in the fourth application filed in April that non-communication of the arrest grounds was raised for the first time.
The petition says the trial court accepted this plea and granted bail on April 27 without examining whether any actual prejudice had been caused, leading to the State’s unsuccessful challenge before the High Court.
The petition also relies on forensic findings, including a CFSL report said to place Sonam at the same locations as the deceased and other accused through CCTV footage and seized material.
It further alleges this corroborates the movement of co-accused Vishal Singh Chauhan, Aakash Singh Rajput, and Anand Kurmi along the same route.
It is also stated that Vipin Raghuvanshi, Raja’s brother, filed the missing-person complaint that led to the registration of the FIR. The chargesheet was reportedly filed in September 2025 against five accused and later supplemented in February to include arms-related charges against a sixth person.
Case Title: State of Meghalaya v. Sonam Raghuvanshi@ Bitti@ Bittu