A Shillong court that granted bail to Sonam Raghuvanshi — the prime accused in the murder of her husband during a honeymoon trip last year — criticised the prosecution for attempting to defend a key procedural lapse as “clerical error” in a detailed order released on Wednesday.
The lapse involved the prosecution citing the wrong section — Section 403 instead of 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — and became the grounds on which the 25-year-old woman was given bail on Tuesday, despite the nature of the crime.
Her bail plea was rejected thrice in the past. She was in custody since 10 months and walked out of jail on Wednesday.
In a strongly worded ruling, additional deputy commissioner (Judicial), East Khasi Hills stated that the “Intimation of Grounds of Arrest” served to the accused was fundamentally defective. “A bare perusal… would indicate that the petitioner was not informed about the offence u/s 103(1) BNS,” the court observed, noting that the documents cited incorrect sections (403 instead of 103) and failed to specify the actual charge of murder.
The BNS, which replaced the Indian Penal Code (IPC) on July 1, 2024, does not have a section 403 (1). Under the IPC, section 403 dealt with the offense of dishonest misappropriation of property.
{{/usCountry}}The BNS, which replaced the Indian Penal Code (IPC) on July 1, 2024, does not have a section 403 (1). Under the IPC, section 403 dealt with the offense of dishonest misappropriation of property.
{{/usCountry}}Rejecting the prosecution’s claim of a “clerical error,” the court held that such inconsistencies across all documents could not be treated as minor lapses.
“Though it has been argued that this is a clerical error, however such error cannot occur in all documents,” the order read. It noted that across multiple official records, including the arrest memo, inspection memo and case diary extracts, the same incorrect sections were repeatedly used.
The court further flagged that none of the checkboxes indicating the accusations against Sonam were ticked.
Crucially, the court ruled that the failure to clearly communicate the grounds of arrest deprived the accused of her right to defend herself, thereby violating Article 22(1) of the Constitution. “Sufficient knowledge of facts constituting grounds of arrest has not been effectively communicated… prejudice has been caused to her as far as her defence is concerned,” the order stated.
Citing Supreme Court rulings, the court concluded that such a violation vitiates the arrest itself and entitles the accused to bail.
The court approved the bail plea subject to several conditions, including that the accused shall not abscond, tamper with evidence, or influence witnesses. She is required to attend every court hearing, remain within the court’s jurisdiction unless permitted otherwise, and execute a personal bond of ₹50,000 with two sureties.
Indore-based businessman Raja Raghuvanshi was found dead in a gorge near Wei Sawdong Falls in Sohra (Cherrapunji) in June 2025 during his honeymoon. Police alleged that Sonam conspired with her alleged lover and hired killers to execute the crime.