The Raja Raghuvanshi murder case has progressed from a honeymoon disappearance in Meghalaya to a high-profile legal battle in the Supreme Court. Prime accused Sonam Raghuvanshi remains on bail after courts cited procedural lapses in her arrest, while the Meghalaya government seeks cancellation of that relief. Meanwhile, the murder trial continues before the competent court.
Agartala/Shillong: The legal battle surrounding the sensational Raja Raghuvanshi murder case has entered a new phase after the Meghalaya government approached the Supreme Court against the bail granted to prime accused Sonam Raghuvanshi. Information collected by the Enewstime Editors’ Desk indicates that while the appeal focuses on alleged procedural lapses during her arrest, the case has evolved dramatically since the Indore-based couple travelled to Meghalaya for their honeymoon in May 2025.
Our Editors’ Desk based on IANS inputs prepares a timeline. Here’s a chronological account of the developments that transformed a honeymoon trip into one of India’s most closely watched criminal investigations.
Newly married couple leaves for Meghalaya honeymoon
Soon after their wedding in May 2025, Indore businessman Raja Raghuvanshi and his wife Sonam Raghuvanshi travelled to Meghalaya for their honeymoon.
The couple planned to explore the state’s popular tourist destinations, including Sohra (Cherrapunji), known for its waterfalls, caves and scenic landscapes. Initially, their vacation appeared routine before events took a tragic turn.
Couple disappears during sightseeing trip
Concern grew after the couple went missing while visiting Sohra. Their disappearance prompted an extensive search operation involving the Meghalaya Police, local authorities and rescue personnel.
The incident attracted national attention as investigators attempted to determine whether the couple had met with an accident or fallen victim to foul play.
Raja’s body recovered from gorge
The investigation took a dramatic turn when Raja Raghuvanshi’s body was recovered from a deep gorge near Wei Sawdong Falls.
Officials reported multiple injuries on the victim’s body, strengthening suspicions that his death was not accidental. Meanwhile, Sonam remained untraceable for several days, intensifying speculation surrounding the case.
The discovery shifted the investigation from a missing persons case to a homicide probe.
Search for Sonam ends with arrest
Following days of investigation across multiple states, law enforcement agencies located Sonam Raghuvanshi and took her into custody.
| Meghalaya related News: Meghalaya’s Tura Gets Smart City Push Before National Games |
| You may also like: Multinational Exercise PRAGATI 2026 Strengthens Defence Ties in Meghalaya |
The Meghalaya Police subsequently alleged that she had conspired with her alleged lover and hired assailants to eliminate Raja during the honeymoon.
Investigators later arrested several other accused from different parts of the country as the probe expanded.
Police file chargesheet after investigation
After collecting evidence and recording witness statements, the investigating agency completed its probe and submitted a chargesheet before the competent trial court.
The filing of the chargesheet marked the beginning of formal judicial proceedings, with the prosecution preparing to present evidence against all the accused.
The murder trial is currently underway.
Bail granted over arrest procedure
The legal focus shifted in April 2026 when a Shillong court granted bail to Sonam Raghuvanshi.
Rather than examining the merits of the murder allegations, the court concentrated on whether the arrest complied with mandatory legal safeguards.
The court held that investigators had failed to properly communicate the grounds of arrest to the accused.
It also noted that several arrest-related documents—including the arrest memo, inspection memo, justification checklist, rights intimation and extracts from the case diary—incorrectly cited Section 403(1) instead of Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the provision dealing with murder.
According to the court, the repeated error indicated more than a mere typographical mistake and affected compliance with statutory arrest procedures.
Meghalaya High Court upholds bail
The Meghalaya government challenged the bail order before the Meghalaya High Court, arguing that the procedural irregularity had caused no actual prejudice to the accused.
The state contended that Sonam was fully aware of the murder allegation because she had signed the arrest documents, appeared before the magistrate during remand proceedings and was represented by legal counsel throughout.
It also relied on previous Supreme Court rulings to argue that such procedural defects could be treated as curable irregularities.
However, Justice W. Diengdoh declined to interfere with the Shillong court’s findings, allowing Sonam to continue on bail.
Supreme Court challenge marks latest development
The latest chapter unfolded on Thursday when the Meghalaya government moved the Supreme Court of India against the High Court order.
Appearing before a Bench headed by Justice M. M. Sundresh, Tushar Mehta sought an urgent hearing of the state’s Special Leave Petition (SLP).
The Solicitor General argued that bail had been granted solely because the grounds of arrest were allegedly not fully communicated and expressed concern that the accused might abscond if the order remained in force.
The apex court agreed to list the matter for an early hearing.
Why the case matters
The Raja Raghuvanshi murder case has now become significant not only because of the serious allegations surrounding the killing but also due to the legal questions it raises about arrest procedures and the rights of accused persons.
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear Meghalaya’s appeal, the outcome could influence how courts assess procedural lapses in criminal investigations while balancing constitutional safeguards with the prosecution’s interest in serious offences.
Even as the bail dispute continues before the apex court, the criminal trial in the competent court remains in progress, ensuring that the prosecution of the accused proceeds independently of the ongoing legal challenge over bail.
