Shillong: The Supreme Court will hear on Friday the Meghalaya government’s petition challenging the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in the alleged murder of her husband, Raja Raghuvanshi, during the couple’s honeymoon in Meghalaya.
The matter was mentioned before a Bench headed by Justice M.M. Sundresh by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who sought an urgent hearing on the state’s Special Leave Petition (SLP). The Bench, which also includes Justice Sheel Nagu, agreed to list the case for hearing on Friday. Court records indicate that the Meghalaya government filed the SLP on Wednesday evening.
During the mentioning, the Solicitor General argued that there was a significant possibility of the accused fleeing if the bail order remained in force. He submitted before the court that concerns over Sonam Raghuvanshi absconding had earlier been cited on two occasions when her bail was denied.
The legal challenge comes days after the Meghalaya High Court refused to interfere with the bail granted by the Shillong Sessions Court. Following that order, Raja Raghuvanshi’s family also announced its decision to move the Supreme Court seeking cancellation of Sonam’s bail. The family had criticised the prosecution’s handling of the case and stated that it would appoint a private lawyer to pursue the matter independently.
On June 29, the Meghalaya High Court dismissed the state’s appeal against the Sessions Court’s April 27 order granting bail to Sonam Raghuvanshi. The High Court held that the investigating agency had failed to properly inform the accused of the grounds of her arrest, amounting to a violation of her constitutional rights.
According to the High Court, the manner in which the arrest was carried out reflected a lack of proper application of mind by the investigating agency. It observed that the alleged failure to effectively communicate the grounds of arrest undermined the legality of the arrest process itself and strengthened the accused’s case that her rights had not been adequately protected at the time she was taken into custody.
Dear Reader,
Every day, our team at EastMojo travels through rain, rough roads, and remote hills to bring you stories that matter – stories from your town, your people, your Northeast.
We do this because we believe in truthful, independent journalism. No big corporate backing, no government pressure – just honest reporting by local journalists who live and breathe the same air you do.
But to keep doing this work, we need you. Your small contribution helps us pay our reporters fairly, reach places others ignore, and keep asking the tough questions.
If you believe the Northeast deserves its own fearless voice, stand with us.
Support independent journalism. Be a Member.
Thank you,
Karma Paljor
Editor-in-Chief, eastmojo.com
The court further ruled that the arrest procedure was inconsistent with the safeguards guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution, which requires that every arrested person be informed of the reasons for arrest and be allowed to consult a lawyer of their choice. It also referred to Section 47(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which obligates police to disclose the full particulars of the offence and the grounds of arrest at the time of detention.
Holding that these procedural shortcomings went to the root of the legality of the arrest, the High Court concluded that they constituted sufficient grounds to uphold the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi.
Also Read | What’s at stake if Nagaland gets its census wrong ‘again’?