The Supreme Court on July 21 offered Sonam Raghuvanshi-the prime accused in the alleged murder of her husband, Raja Raghuvanshi-two choices while hearing the Meghalaya government’s challenge to bail that had been granted by a trial court and later upheld by the Meghalaya High Court. The Bench said it could either decide the state’s appeal on its merits after hearing her arguments or direct her to surrender so public witnesses could be examined while the bail plea remains under consideration.
A Bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and P.B. Varale told Sonam’s counsel that the court would “either pass an order on merits or ask [her] to surrender, let the public witnesses be examined-meanwhile we will decide the matter on merits (on bail),” recording the option orally in court.
Sonam’s lawyer sought time to obtain instructions and told the court he would respond on Thursday on whether she would surrender or contest the appeal on merits. The court also questioned Sonam’s conduct after the alleged murder and asked her to explain her claim that the “grounds of arrest” were not provided to her.
Appearing for the Meghalaya government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed bail, arguing that Sonam had voluntarily surrendered to police and therefore could not later challenge her arrest on the ground that reasons were not communicated. Mehta described any omission in the arrest memo as a clerical error and told the court, “If the arrested accused is caught red-handed, there is no reason to provide grounds of arrest. If a person surrenders, the arrested person cannot subsequently use the ground that the grounds of arrest were not provided.”
The Meghalaya government has challenged both the trial court and the Meghalaya High Court orders that granted Sonam bail. She is accused of conspiring to murder her husband during their honeymoon in Meghalaya. The Supreme Court will resume hearing the matter on Thursday after Sonam’s counsel informs the court whether she will surrender or press the state’s appeal on its merits.
