The Meghalaya High Court on Monday 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 in May 2025.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice W. Diengdoh rejects the State government's appeal challenging the bail order. The Court had reserved its verdict on June 10 after hearing arguments over ten days. The detailed judgment is awaited.

Sonam had secured bail from the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Shillong, after the trial court found that the investigating agency failed to properly communicate the grounds of her arrest, thereby prejudicing her defence.

The Shillong court noted 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 cited Section 403(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) instead of Section 103(1), which deals with the offence of murder.

Rejecting the State's contention that the repeated reference to Section 403(1) was merely a clerical error, the trial court observed that the same mistake appeared consistently across every document relating to the accused. It further held that none of the records informed Sonam that she had been arrested for the offence of murder under Section 103(1) BNS, nor did they clearly communicate the specific factual grounds for her arrest.

Aggrieved by the bail order, the State approached the High Court.

Appearing for the State, Advocate General and Senior Advocate Amit Kumar argued that Sonam had failed to demonstrate any actual prejudice caused by the procedural lapse. He submitted that the incorrect reference to Section 403 instead of Section 103 was an inadvertent typographical error and that the accused was fully aware she was facing murder charges.

The Advocate General pointed to Sonam's signatures on the arrest documents, the remand orders, and her participation in multiple bail proceedings as evidence that she had complete knowledge of the allegations. He also relied on the Supreme Court's decision in State of Karnataka v. Sri Darshan (2025), which held that procedural irregularities, in the absence of demonstrable prejudice, are curable defects and do not by themselves justify the grant of bail.

During the hearing, Justice Diengdoh questioned why the same error had been repeated across multiple documents if it was merely typographical. The Court also observed that the arrest forms appeared to have been filled using a standard template without proper application of mind, noting that one part of the form even referred to the accused as a "deserter" from the armed forces—an entirely irrelevant description in the present case.

While accepting that mistakes had occurred in the documentation, the Advocate General reiterated that Sonam had been represented by legal counsel from the outset, had actively contested the proceedings through three earlier bail applications, and was at all times aware that she had been arrested in connection with a murder case. He further argued that there was a significant risk of the accused absconding if released.

Justice Diengdoh, however, observed during the hearing that the bail conditions adequately addressed such concerns and that the law would take its course if any violation occurred.

Advocate L. Thapa, assisted by Advocate Sudeep Rana, appeared on behalf of Sonam Raghuvanshi.

Background

Raja and Sonam Raghuvanshi were married on May 12, 2025, and travelled to Meghalaya for their honeymoon. The couple went missing on May 23 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.

Sonam, who remained untraceable until June 8, was eventually located near a roadside eatery on the Varanasi–Ghazipur highway. Meghalaya Police subsequently named her and 21-year-old Raj Kushwaha as the principal accused, alleging that the murder had been planned in advance.

The police have since filed a chargesheet running over 700 pages, alleging that Sonam and Kushwaha conspired to murder Raja.