Shillong | The Meghalaya High Court has upheld a lower court order granting bail to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in the high-profile murder of Indore businessman Raja Raghuvanshi, after finding no grounds to interfere with the earlier ruling that highlighted procedural irregularities in her arrest.

A single bench of Justice W. Diengdoh dismissed the Meghalaya government’s appeal against an April 2026 order of the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Shillong, which had granted bail to the accused. The High Court had reserved its verdict on June 10 after hearing extensive arguments from both sides. A detailed judgment is awaited.

The controversy centred on errors in arrest-related documents prepared by the investigating agency. The Shillong court had observed that authorities repeatedly cited Section 403(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita instead of Section 103(1), which pertains to the offence of murder.

According to the lower court, the incorrect provision was mentioned across several documents, including the arrest memo, checklist justifying the arrest, inspection memo, intimation of rights and extracts from the case diary. The court concluded that the accused had not been properly informed that she was being arrested on a murder charge, thereby affecting her legal rights.

Rejecting the prosecution’s argument that the error was merely typographical, the court noted that the mistake appeared repeatedly in multiple documents, suggesting a more serious procedural lapse.

Challenging the bail order, the Meghalaya government argued before the High Court that the error had not caused any real prejudice to the accused. Appearing for the state, Advocate General Amit Kumar contended that Sonam was fully aware of the allegations against her, pointing to her signatures on arrest documents, her appearance before a magistrate during remand proceedings and the fact that she had legal representation from the beginning.

The state also cited the Supreme Court judgment in State of Karnataka v. Sri Darshan, arguing that procedural defects of this nature are curable and should not automatically result in bail unless actual prejudice is demonstrated.

During the hearings, Justice Diengdoh reportedly questioned why the same error appeared repeatedly across official records and observed that some of the forms appeared to have been copied from standard templates. The court also noted that one portion of the arrest documentation incorrectly referred to the accused as a “deserter” from the armed forces, raising further concerns about the preparation and verification of the documents.

While the state argued that Sonam posed a flight risk, the High Court observed that the bail conditions imposed by the lower court were clear and that any violation could be dealt with under law.

The case relates to the murder of Raja Raghuvanshi, a businessman from Indore, who travelled to Meghalaya with his wife Sonam for their honeymoon shortly after their marriage in May 2025. The couple went missing during a visit to Sohra, triggering a large-scale search operation.

Raja’s body was later recovered from a gorge near Wei Sawdong Falls with multiple injuries, while Sonam remained untraceable for several days before being arrested.

According to Meghalaya Police, Sonam allegedly conspired with her purported lover and hired assailants to murder her husband during the honeymoon. Several co-accused were subsequently arrested from different states.

Police have since completed the investigation and filed a chargesheet. The trial in the case is currently underway.