Meghalaya High Court upholds bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi in Raja Raghuvanshi murder case

The Meghalaya High Court on June 29 upheld a Shillong court's April 2026 order granting bail to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in the alleged murder of her husband, Raja Raghuvanshi, during their honeymoon in Meghalaya last year.

A single bench of Justice W. Diengdoh dismissed the state government's appeal challenging the bail order. The court had reserved its verdict on June 10 after hearing arguments from both sides over a period of more than 10 days. A detailed judgment is awaited.

Sonam was granted bail by the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Shillong, primarily on the ground that the investigating agency had failed to properly communicate the grounds of her arrest, thereby prejudicing her legal defence.

The trial court had observed that police documents, including the checklist for justification of arrest, arrest memo, inspection memo, intimation of rights of the arrested person and extracts of the case diary, repeatedly mentioned *Section 403(1)* of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) instead of *Section 103(1)*, which pertains to the offence of murder.

The Shillong court had rejected the prosecution's argument that the repeated reference to the incorrect provision was merely a clerical or typographical error.

The court noted that none of the arrest-related documents informed Sonam that she had been arrested under Section 103(1) BNS for murder. It further observed that the formats used by the police also failed to specify the factual grounds constituting the offence.

Challenging the bail order, the Meghalaya government argued before the High Court that the procedural error had not caused any actual prejudice to the accused. Advocate General Amit Kumar submitted that Sonam was fully aware of the allegations against her, having signed the arrest documents, appeared before courts during remand proceedings and filed multiple bail applications with legal representation.

The state also relied on a Supreme Court judgment in State of Karnataka vs Sri Darshan (2025), arguing that a procedural irregularity without demonstrable prejudice amounted only to a curable defect and could not justify the grant of bail.

During the hearings, Justice Diengdoh questioned the prosecution over the repeated mention of the wrong legal provision in several documents and also observed that portions of the arrest documentation appeared to have been prepared using standard templates. One section of the form even referred to the accused as a "deserter" from the armed forces, an observation the court found irrelevant to the case.

Responding to concerns raised by the court, the Advocate General maintained that despite the typographical errors, Sonam had complete knowledge of the murder allegations against her throughout the investigation and judicial proceedings. He also argued that there was a possibility of the accused absconding if released on bail. However, the court observed that the bail conditions were adequate and that the law would take its course in the event of any violation.

The case stems from the alleged murder of Raja Raghuvanshi, who had married Sonam on May 12, 2025. The couple went missing on May 23 while on their honeymoon in Meghalaya after checking out of a homestay in Nongriat. Their rented scooter was later found abandoned near Sohrarim.

On June 2, Raja's body was recovered from a deep gorge near Weisawdong Falls in East Khasi Hills district. Sonam, who remained missing until June 8, was subsequently traced near a roadside eatery on the Varanasi-Ghazipur highway in Uttar Pradesh.

The Meghalaya Police later named Sonam and her alleged associate, Raj Kushwaha, as the prime accused in the case, alleging that the murder had been premeditated. Investigators have since filed a chargesheet exceeding 700 pages, alleging that the conspiracy was hatched by Sonam and Kushwaha before the couple travelled to Meghalaya.