Supreme Court Refuses to Stay Sonam Raghuvanshi’s Bail in Honeymoon Murder Case

The Supreme Court in State of Meghalaya v. Sonam Raghuvanshi @ Bitti @ Bittu refused to stay the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in the alleged murder of her husband, Raja Raghuvanshi, during their honeymoon in Meghalaya.

A partial working days Bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Sheel Nagu, however, issued notice on the petition filed by the Meghalaya government challenging the bail order. The Court indicated that it had initial concerns about the reasoning adopted by the High Court.

Sonam had already been released by the time the matter reached the Supreme Court. Taking note of this fact, the Bench declined to suspend the bail order immediately, although it agreed to examine whether the relief had been granted on legally sustainable grounds.

Representing the State, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta described the bail decision as “really shocking”. He argued that the alleged murder was pre-planned and involved Sonam and three other accused persons who allegedly attacked Raja before throwing his body into a gorge.

The State submitted that Sonam had earlier absconded and was later located in Uttar Pradesh. It also argued that the seriousness of the allegations, the number of witnesses and the possibility of her fleeing should have been considered while deciding her bail application.

The principal issue arose from an alleged typing error in the arrest documents. Section 403(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita was mentioned instead of Section 103(1), which deals with punishment for murder. The State maintained that the mistake caused no prejudice to the accused.

Mehta further informed the Court that the Magistrate issuing the transit warrant had recorded that the grounds of arrest were communicated to Sonam. He contended that a clerical mistake should not invalidate the arrest when the accused was aware of the allegations against her.

Justice Sundresh observed, “Prima facie, we have some reservations about the High Court’s judgment.” The Bench questioned whether bail could be granted solely because an incorrect statutory provision was quoted, particularly when Sonam’s earlier bail request had been rejected on merits.

Counsel for Sonam argued that the grounds of arrest had never been properly communicated. He also submitted that strict bail conditions required her to remain in Shillong and that the ongoing trial reduced any risk of absconding.

The Bench ultimately declined interim interference because Sonam was already out of custody. Justice Sundresh remarked, “But for the fact that she has been released, we would have stayed the order.”

The case relates to Raja’s death during the couple’s honeymoon in May 2025. His body was discovered in a gorge near Weisawdong Falls on June 2, 2025. Police later filed a chargesheet alleging that the murder was planned by Sonam and co-accused Raj Kushwaha.