The Supreme Court currently refuses to stay the bail of Sonam Raghuvanshi. Questions remain on the flaws in the arrest documents in the honeymoon murder case, the next hearing will be on July 9.
New Delhi: A shocking twist has come to light in the country’s most talked about and hair-raising ‘Meghalaya Honeymoon Murder Case’, which has surprised everyone from the Supreme Court of the country to the legal experts. The Supreme Court has clearly refused to stay the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the main accused in the murder of her husband Raja Raghuvanshi. This decision has come when due to a very serious and strange negligence of the police, the accused has come out of the bars after spending 10 months in jail. Read the complete detailed story of this sensational murder case, the ‘blunder’ (big mistake) of the police and the court proceedings here.
The release had already taken place, hence the Supreme Court did not ban it.
The bench of Supreme Court Justice MM Sundaresh and Justice Sheel Nagu said that since Sonam Raghuvanshi has already been released from jail, there is no need to stay the High Court order at this time. Issuing notice to Sonam, the court sought response to the Meghalaya government’s appeal and indicated that the trial situation would also be important in the further hearing. That is, the court did not consider bail as the final relief, but kept the case open for further detailed hearing.
Why did the government say – relief cannot be given only on the basis of technical mistake?
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Meghalaya government, argued that Sonam faces very serious allegations and relief cannot be given to her merely on the basis of technical errors. He also referred to Pune’s famous ‘Fort Murder Case’ before the court and said that in serious criminal cases the courts should also take into account the wider circumstances.
Scroll to load tweet…
What was that strange legal mistake? Due to which the beaten police became ugly
The most important aspect of this entire case became the documents related to the arrest. The Shillong trial court had found that the investigating agency did not mention the correct legal section 403(1) related to murder in the arrest memo, case diary, checklist and other records. Wrong sections of the Indian Judicial Code were repeatedly mentioned in the documents. The court held that it could not be said to be a mere typing or clerical mistake, as none of the documents clearly stated the accused that he was being arrested on charges of murder. On this basis, the trial court had granted bail to Sonam in April.
High Court had also raised serious questions on the investigation
The Meghalaya government challenged the trial court’s decision in the High Court, saying it was merely a typographical error that caused no real harm to the accused. But the High Court did not accept the government’s argument. The court raised questions as to how the same mistake was repeated in several official documents. The High Court also remarked that some documents seemed to have been copied from an old template. Even a mention was found in the records in which the accused was described as a deserter from the armed forces, although he had no connection with the case. The court considered this as serious negligence on the part of the investigating agency.
From honeymoon to murder… how did the whole matter come to light?
Indore residents Raja Raghuvanshi and Sonam Raghuvanshi got married on May 11 last year. A few days after the marriage, both of them reached Sohra in Meghalaya for honeymoon on 20th May. Three days later, both of them went missing mysteriously. Raja Raghuvanshi’s body was recovered on 2 June. After this, on June 9, Sonam was arrested from Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh. During the investigation, her alleged lover Raj Singh Kushwaha was also arrested. This matter remained a topic of discussion across the country since the beginning.
Scroll to load tweet…
‘The accused is a fugitive who has fled from the army…’ The investigation conducted without thinking was exposed in the High Court.
Angered by this decision of the trial court, the Meghalaya government immediately approached the High Court. The government argued that this was just a human error and it did not cause any legal harm to the accused. But the single bench of Justice W Diengdoh of the High Court rejected this argument outright.
| court level | Government’s argument and court’s tough stance |
| Meghalaya High Court | The court raised the question that how did the same mistake appear again and again in every government document? |
| copy-paste game | Parts of the investigation record were copied directly from the standard template, including the random description of Sonam as a ‘deserter from the armed forces’. |
| court comment | It is clear that the paperwork has been done without applying any mind, which shows the irresponsibility of the investigating agency. |
Echo of ‘Pune Murder Case’ in Supreme Court: Now why are everyone’s eyes fixed on July 9?
After receiving a setback from the High Court, the Meghalaya government approached the Supreme Court. During the hearing held on Friday, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the government, cited Pune’s famous ‘Lohgarh Fort Murder Case’ (Ketan Aggarwal murder case) to underline the seriousness of the case. He told the court that Sonam has a very serious allegation of murder of her own husband, hence it cannot be left free merely on the basis of technical and clerical mistakes. The bench of Justice MM Sundaresh and Justice Sheel Nagu expressed deep concern over the negligence of Meghalaya Police and the order of the High Court, but refused to immediately stay the bail of Sonam Raghuvanshi as she has already been released. The top court said that they would like to see the progress of the trial and the ground reality before interfering in the matter.
What is the biggest message of this decision?
At present, the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi remains intact, but the case has not yet reached its final conclusion. It is clear from the comments of the Supreme Court that the court wants to review in depth all three aspects – technical flaws, investigation process and trial. In such a situation, the hearing in the coming days in this high-profile case is considered very important.