“I am innocent, falsely implicated…” says Sonam Raghuvanshi’s affidavit in the Supreme Court

New Delhi: Last Friday, the Supreme Court declined to immediately stay the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in Meghalaya’s high-profile ‘honeymoon murder case’. The Meghalaya Police had challenged the High Court order that granted her bail. During the hearing, the Supreme Court issued a notice to Sonam, asking why her bail should not be cancelled.

‘I am innocent; I have been framed’
Sonam Raghuvanshi has now filed a counter-affidavit in the Supreme Court, asserting her innocence. She submitted to the court that she has been wrongly implicated in the case. She argues that the prosecution has constructed the entire case against her based merely on apprehensions and circumstantial evidence. A person cannot be held guilty simply because allegations have been leveled against them. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the matter again on Thursday (today).

In her affidavit, Sonam stated that she has been consistently cooperating with the trial process since being granted bail. She maintained that she cannot be held responsible for the delays in the trial proceedings. She has cooperated at every stage—from the investigation to the judicial proceedings—and has adhered to all conditions imposed by the court while granting bail.

‘No grounds to send me back to jail’
In her response, Sonam also noted that she was granted bail on April 27, 2026, and was released from jail the very next day, April 28. Consequently, there is no legal justification for sending her back to jail now. She submitted to the court that the necessary legal grounds for cancelling bail do not exist in this case. Furthermore, the state government has not alleged that she violated any of the bail conditions. In the affidavit, Sonam also stated that there is no longer a need for any recovery from her in this matter, as the police have already filed the charge sheet. Consequently, there is no apprehension of evidence being tampered with.

What did Sonam Raghuvanshi say during the previous hearing?
During the previous hearing, the counsel representing Sonam Raghuvanshi argued that at the time of her arrest, she was neither provided with a lawyer nor informed of the specific grounds for the arrest. It was contended that the police had merely handed her a blank proforma. In response, the Supreme Court questioned why this issue had not been raised before the court earlier if it was so significant. The Court also asked whether the law prevents the police from re-arresting an individual if bail was granted solely on technical grounds.

During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Meghalaya government, described the case as highly sensational. He informed the court that, according to the charge sheet, Sonam Raghuvanshi was allegedly involved in conspiring to commit and executing the murder, and that other accused persons were also part of the conspiracy. He further noted that the lower court had already rejected Sonam’s bail plea three times; in those orders, the court had cited the existence of strong prima facie evidence against her and the apprehension that she might abscond.

Trial in the murder case still underway
Regarding the current status of the Raja Raghuvanshi murder case, the trial is ongoing and has not yet reached a final conclusion. Sonam Raghuvanshi is currently out on bail, while proceedings against the other co-accused continue. Meanwhile, the Meghalaya government and Raja Raghuvanshi’s family are engaged in a legal battle to have her bail cancelled. The upcoming hearing in the Supreme Court is considered crucial for the entire matter, as it could largely determine the future course of the case.