Shillong, Apr 28: Sonam Raghuvanshi, accused of murdering her husband Raja Raghuvanshi during a honeymoon trip to Sohra in May 2025, has been granted conditional bail by the District and Sessions Court of Dashalene R Kharbteng.
Presiding over the matter, the court ordered a bail bond of Rs 50,000 and mandated that the accused remain within the court’s jurisdiction, except with due permission of the court. Sonam was released from the Shillong District Jail on Tuesday evening at around 7 pm.
The court also stated that Sonam should not abscond or tamper with the evidence or witnesses. Furthermore, she is required to appear before the court during subsequent hearings, Special Public Prosecutor KC Gautam said.
In the course of hearing of the case, the counsel for the petitioner raised the issue regarding the illegality of her arrest for non-intimation of ground of arrest.
According to the petitioner’s counsel at the time of her arrest, the police did not comply with the mandatory requirement of providing the ground of arrest as mandated by law and thus violated Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India.
The Counsel submitted that the right to be informed of the ground of arrest flows from Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and any infringement of the Fundamental Right would vitiate the process of arrest and remand and the mere fact that the Chargesheet has been filed in the matter and the trial has also started, would not validate the illegality and the unconstitutionality committed at the time of arresting the accused and the grant of initial custody/remand of the accused, even if the accused is remanded to custody time and again.
“There is no indication of any ground of arrest been intimated to the accused, what is placed on record is a mere format of purported intimation of the ground of arrest which do not contain any ground of arrest, as such the initial arrest of the accused being violative of the Constitutional mandate is illegal per se which also makes the subsequent remand and custody illegal and as such she is entitled to be released on bail,” the Counsel stated.
According to the Court which read a prepared format under the heading “Intimation of Grounds of Arrest” with a checklist of accusations/charges said to have been committed by the accused person.
According to the Court in the said format presented to the petitioner, none of the
checkboxes have been ticked to indicate the said charges against the petitioner.
It stated that even the sections of law referred to therein is Sohra PS Case No. 7/2025 u/s 403(1)/238(a)/309(6)/3(6) BNS. However, the case has been registered u/s 103(1)/238(a)/309(6)/3(6) BNS.
“A bare perusal of the Intimation of Grounds of arrest would indicate that the Petitioner was not informed about the offence u/s 103(1) BNS,” the Court stated.
The Court stated that though it has been argued that this is a clerical error, however according to the judge such error cannot occur in all documents.
“Infact, in all documents pertaining to Sonam Raghuvanshi, from the check list for justification of arrest, memo of arrest, inspection memo, intimation of rights of the arrested person, extract of case diary, the sections referred to in all the documents is Sohra PS Case No. 7/2025 u/s 403(1)/238(a)/309(6)/3(6) BNS. In none of the documents has the petitioner been intimated that she is arrested for the offence u/s 103(1) BNS,” the Court stated.
According to the Court even in the formats of the intimation of grounds of arrest it is observed that specific facts constituting the offence have not been communicated to the accused person.
“Going by the intimation of grounds of arrest presented to the petitioner, there is no indication that the charges against her have been communicated to her. This shows that sufficient knowledge of facts constituting grounds of arrest, has not been effectively communicated to the petitioner herein in clear terms. Therefore, it can be said that prejudice has been caused to her as far as her defense is concerned,” the Court said.
The Court moreover said that there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner was represented by a counsel at the time when she was first produced before the court at Ghazipur, whereby this plea could have been raised by her.
“Under the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, this
Court is convinced that the petitioner has been able to make out a case of not having effectively communicated the grounds of arrest upon her arrest,” the Court stated.
Sonam, the primary accused in the murder of her husband Raja during their honeymoon in Sohra, Meghalaya, has been granted bail after nearly a year in judicial custody.
Raja’s decomposed body was discovered in a deep gorge on June 2, 2025.
Following the discovery, police arrested Sonam and four accomplices – her alleged lover Raj Kushwaha, Akash Rajput, Anand Kurmi and Vishal Singh Chauhan – across Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh.
Special Public Prosecutor Gautam dismissed the bail as a procedural necessity rather than a setback for the trial.
