SC quashes Sonam’s bailAllows Sonam To File Fresh Bail Plea After 6 MonthsSC quashes Sonam’s bailAllows Sonam To File Fresh Bail Plea After 6 MonthsSC quashes Sonam’s bail12 NEW DELHI: Supreme Court Thursday said “inadequate communication” of grounds of arrest to an accused would not automatically vitiate the arrest and quashed the bail granted by the Meghalaya high court to Sonam Raghuvanshi, who is facing trial for killing her husband during their honeymoon in the north-eastern state in May 2025. It directed her to surrender within three weeks.Rejecting her plea that she was not furnished grounds of arrest, which is mandatory, a bench of Justices M M Sundresh and P B Varale differentiated between complete non-service of grounds of arrest and inadequate communication of grounds of arrest, and said while the former would vitiate an arrest, in the latter case, the court has to examine whether prejudice was caused to the accused.Meghalaya HC granted Raghuvanshi bail on her fourth attempt on the ground that arrest documents mentioned the non-existent Section 403(1) of BNS instead of Section 103(1). Quashing the order, the apex court said non-furnishing of grounds of arrest could not be cited at a belated stage when regular bail plea was rejected on merit.The bench admitted that it was a tough decision to cancel the bail but said it had to be done as Raghuvanshi’s continued enlargement at this stage might hinder trial in the case. The court allowed her to file a fresh bail plea after six months.The court noted that Raghuvanshi had expressed satisfaction regarding the reasons for her arrest. “As recorded earlier, the respondent expressed satisfaction on the reasons behind her arrest. Therefore, we are not inclined to go into the issue as to whether the case involves surrender or arrest followed by production before the court. Suffice it to state that both the courts committed an error in granting bail on the basis of the judgment rendered by this court,” the bench said. It said the SC had ruled for furnishing written grounds of arrest on Nov 6, 2025, but she was arrested on June 9, 2025, before the judgment was delivered.Challenging the HC’s order, solicitor general Tushar Mehta and the state’s advocate general Amit Kumar pleaded that Raghuvanshi was wrongly granted bail and released on technical grounds of typographical error as the police had erroneously referred to Section 403(1) BNS instead of Section 103(1) BNS (punishment for murder).Get the latest India News and Live updates. Download the TOI app.End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosCJP Protest: Injured Protester Returns, Another Searches For Missing StudentIndia Conducts Maiden Flight Test Of Long-Range ‘Kusha’ Air Defence Missile SystemWhere Are CJP Leaders? Questions Rise Over Jantar Mantar Protest Management Amid Clashes, Heckling”Sent Four Proposals”: Govt Reaches Out To Protesters, Jitendra Singh Calls For DialogueFree Food, First Aid, Sanitary Pads: What’s Keeping the CJP Protest Going | Jantar MantarPriyanka Gandhi Targets PM Modi Over Student Protests, Says ‘Students Are Not Terrorists’Houses of Two ‘Pak Sponsored’ Militants Demolished Overnight After Deadly Attack In AnantnagWhy The Indian Army Says The Siliguri Corridor Is No Longer A “Chicken’s Neck”?Tehseen Poonawalla Alleges “Gadkari’s Son Got Richer” Over E20 Fuel Policy37,000 Lives Lost On Known Highway Death Traps In 3 Years: Who Is Responsible?123PhotostoriesWhy are more healthy young adults getting cancer? Dr Siddhartha Mukherjee’s eye-opening answer to Oprah is making people think differentlyUsing a microwave? Here are 5 common mistakes you need to stop making today and whySreeleela’s emerald green saree is what happens when royal romance meets timeless fashionMeet the ‘vampires’ of the Amazon: Animals that survive by drinking blood10 gender-neutral baby names that are growing in popularity around the worldThe secret history of 5 Indian bridal fashion traditions that never went out of style’Speed’, ‘M3GAN’ , ‘Smurfs’ – The last village’ and others: Top 7 OTT releases on Netflix in August10 Dosa types to get your protein sorted for breakfast5 most dangerous birds of prey that rule the skies with deadly precision5 Indian fabrics that were once more valuable than gold123Hot PicksMHT CET merit listDelhi metroCJP ProtestNTA NET Answer KeyDU UG admissionsJPSC recruitmentNEET paper controversyAAI recruitment 2026Caitline ClarkTop TrendingOba FemiCJP ProtestersCJPCJP ProtestHyderabad RapeSamras Vidya Setu campaignSupreme CourtZlatan ibrahimovicHarbhajan singhIND U19 vs Sri Lanka U19
NEW DELHI: Supreme Court Thursday said “inadequate communication” of grounds of arrest to an accused would not automatically vitiate the arrest and quashed the bail granted by the Meghalaya high court to Sonam Raghuvanshi, who is facing trial for killing her husband during their honeymoon in the north-eastern state in May 2025. It directed her to surrender within three weeks.Rejecting her plea that she was not furnished grounds of arrest, which is mandatory, a bench of Justices M M Sundresh and P B Varale differentiated between complete non-service of grounds of arrest and inadequate communication of grounds of arrest, and said while the former would vitiate an arrest, in the latter case, the court has to examine whether prejudice was caused to the accused.Meghalaya HC granted Raghuvanshi bail on her fourth attempt on the ground that arrest documents mentioned the non-existent Section 403(1) of BNS instead of Section 103(1). Quashing the order, the apex court said non-furnishing of grounds of arrest could not be cited at a belated stage when regular bail plea was rejected on merit.The bench admitted that it was a tough decision to cancel the bail but said it had to be done as Raghuvanshi’s continued enlargement at this stage might hinder trial in the case. The court allowed her to file a fresh bail plea after six months.The court noted that Raghuvanshi had expressed satisfaction regarding the reasons for her arrest. “As recorded earlier, the respondent expressed satisfaction on the reasons behind her arrest. Therefore, we are not inclined to go into the issue as to whether the case involves surrender or arrest followed by production before the court. Suffice it to state that both the courts committed an error in granting bail on the basis of the judgment rendered by this court,” the bench said. It said the SC had ruled for furnishing written grounds of arrest on Nov 6, 2025, but she was arrested on June 9, 2025, before the judgment was delivered.Challenging the HC’s order, solicitor general Tushar Mehta and the state’s advocate general Amit Kumar pleaded that Raghuvanshi was wrongly granted bail and released on technical grounds of typographical error as the police had erroneously referred to Section 403(1) BNS instead of Section 103(1) BNS (punishment for murder).
