The Supreme Court cancelled the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi in the alleged Meghalaya honeymoon murder case and directed her to surrender within three weeks

The Supreme Court on Thursday cancelled the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in the alleged murder of her husband Raja Raghuvanshi during their honeymoon in Meghalaya, holding that her continued release could hamper the ongoing trial.

The bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and P.B. Varale set aside the June 29 order of the Meghalaya High Court granting bail to Raghuvanshi. However, the Court granted her liberty to seek fresh bail before the trial court if the proceedings are not concluded within six months.

Allowing the State of Meghalaya's appeal, the bench observed: "We are inclined to observe that the continued enlargement of the respondent will hinder the ongoing trial."

The Court directed Raghuvanshi to surrender before the concerned authorities within three weeks.

It further clarified: "In the event of trial not proceeding and concluded within six months, the respondent shall be at liberty to move a fresh application for bail in which neither our present order nor earlier orders rejecting bail will come in the way."

The State informed the Court that the charge sheet had already been filed and that the matter was now at the stage of framing of charges.

Raghuvanshi is accused of conspiring with others to murder her husband, Raja Raghuvanshi, during the couple's honeymoon in Meghalaya in May 2025. She was arrested on June 9, 2025. The Meghalaya High Court had granted her bail on June 29, prompting the State to challenge the order before the Supreme Court.

The High Court had found fault with the investigation, observing that the grounds of arrest had not been properly communicated and noting that the arrest memo mentioned Section 403 instead of Section 103 (punishment for murder) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), terming it a case of non-application of mind.

Before the Supreme Court, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the State, argued that the reference to Section 403 was merely a typographical error and that the grounds of arrest had in fact been furnished to the accused at the time of her arrest. He also pointed out that this was recorded by the Magistrate at Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh, while granting transit remand.

The Supreme Court accepted the State's contention that the alleged defect relating to communication of the grounds of arrest was a "curable" irregularity that could be remedied by re-arrest, and distinguished between complete non-supply of grounds of arrest and furnishing inadequate reasons.

The bench also observed that such an objection ought to have been raised at the earliest opportunity. It noted that Raghuvanshi had not raised the issue of non-supply of grounds of arrest in any of her three earlier bail applications, all of which had been rejected.

Senior Advocate Ardhendumauli Prasad, appearing for Raghuvanshi, opposed the State's plea, submitting that the High Court had already directed his client to remain in Shillong and cooperate with the trial. He also argued that the trial was likely to take considerable time given that the prosecution proposed to examine over 50 witnesses.

Previous Hearings

Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in the murder of her husband had told the Supreme Court that she has been falsely implicated in the case which is based on circumstantial evidence. In her response to the challenge made by State of Meghalaya against the High Court order that upheld bail granted to Sonam, court has been told that the prosecution has to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt during the course of the trial thus, mere allegations on her does not prove the offence particularly in the case of circumstantial evidence.

Earlier, the Supreme Court said that it will be taking up the case challenging bail granted to Sonam on Tuesday July 14, 2026. A bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Shree Chandrashekhar has directed that written submission be filed by then so the matter is heard at length. Noting that the case before it is a serious one, the bench said, "We will consider this matter at length and see if the matter is to be referred to a larger bench..".

Previously, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had vehemently argued before Supreme Court against the order granting bail to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in the murder of her husband Raja Raghuvanshi during their honeymoon in Meghalaya last year. SG Tushar Mehta told a bench comprising Justices MM Sundresh and Sheel Nagu that Sonam had absconded to Uttar Pradesh from Shillong, Meghalaya. This is really shocking, SG Mehta argued today before the bench.

"I will show four pages. this is a case where the couple goes to Meghalaya, it is a pre-determined murder, wife takes husband to some hilly areas and kills..there are three accomplices...assaulted, he was killed and dead body was thrown in the hills..", he had added.

While refusing to stay the order granting bail to Sonam, Court had on July 3, issued notice in the plea moved by State of Meghalaya against the said High Court order that upheld bail granted to her. The court sought Sonam's response to the State's challenge and listed the matter on July 9, 2026 for further hearing.

Background of the Case

The SLP before Supreme Court challenges the judgment dated June 29, 2026, by which the High Court of Meghalaya at Shillong dismissed the State's plea and refused to interfere with a trial court order that had freed the accused on a technical ground.

According to the petition, the trial court granted bail to Sonam Raghuvanshi essentially because one of seven documents prepared at the time of her arrest carried a typographical error, citing "Section 403 BNS" instead of "Section 103 BNS," the provision under which she is charged with murder. The State contends that six other contemporaneous documents, all bearing her own signature, correctly recorded the grounds of her arrest, and that she never raised the issue in her first three bail applications.

The case relates to the killing of Raja Raghuvanshi, whose body was recovered from a gorge near Sohra on June 2, 2025, ten days after he went missing during his honeymoon with Sonam. Investigators allege the murder was carefully planned before the couple even left Indore, in conspiracy with Sonam's associate Raj Kushwaha and three other men who trekked alongside the couple before the killing near Wei Sawdong, where he was allegedly attacked with machetes and his body thrown into a deep gorge.

Sonam was arrested in Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh, on June 9, 2025, after allegedly staging a plan to resurface with a false kidnapping story. The petition states that at the time of arrest, she signed five separate documents, including the memorandum of arrest and an intimation of rights, all indicating she had been informed of the reasons for her arrest. A magistrate in Sohra who examined her days later also recorded that she had confirmed her awareness of the grounds.

The State's plea notes that Sonam filed four bail applications in under a year, the first three rejected after courts found a prima facie case, a flight risk, and a likelihood of her influencing witnesses. It was only in the fourth application, filed in April, that non-communication of arrest grounds was raised for the first time. The trial court accepted this and granted bail on April 27 without examining whether any actual prejudice had been caused, prompting the State's unsuccessful petition before the High Court.

The petition further cites 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, corroborating the movement of co-accused Vishal Singh Chauhan, Aakash Singh Rajput and Anand Kurmi along the same route. Raja's brother, Vipin Raghuvanshi, had filed the missing person's complaint that led to registration of the FIR. The chargesheet, filed in September 2025 against five accused, was supplemented in February to add arms-related charges against a sixth person.

Case Title: State of Meghalaya v. Sonam Raghuvanshi@ Bitti@ Bittu

Bench: Justices MM Sundresh and PB Varale

Hearing Date: July 23, 2026


Tags: