The Supreme Court had canceled Sonam’s bail and directed her to surrender within three weeks
In the murder case of Indore transport businessman Raja Raghuvanshi, the main accused Sonam Raghuvanshi surrendered on Wednesday in the Shillong Court of Meghalaya. From there, she was sent to jail. Earlier, on July 23, the Supreme Court had canceled Sonam’s bail and directed her to surrender before the concerned court within three weeks. Sonam reached the court to surrender even before this period was over.
Now, there is a possibility of acceleration in the judicial process and trial of this much-discussed murder case. During the hearing of the case, the prosecution will present its side before the court based on evidence and witnesses, while the defense will present its arguments.
On Sonam’s surrender, Raja’s brother Vipin Raghuvanshi said, “I would like to thank the Meghalaya government because of whom we have hope for justice today.”
Supreme Court had said – made a mistake by granting bail
Earlier, on July 23, the Supreme Court had ordered Sonam to surrender within three weeks. The Court had said – the High Court and the trial court had made a mistake by granting bail based on alleged flaws in providing information about the grounds for arrest.
Along with this, the Court had directed the police to complete the trial of the case within 6 months. The Court had also clarified that if the trial is not completed within the stipulated period, Sonam Raghuvanshi can re-apply for bail.
Grounds for arrest were stated, so bail was wrong
The Supreme Court had said that under Article 22(1) of the Constitution, it is mandatory to inform about the grounds of arrest, but in this case, there was no complete failure in stating the grounds of arrest.
According to the court, not stating the grounds of arrest at all and some information being inadequate are two different situations. Therefore, granting bail merely on the basis of a technical flaw was not appropriate.
Being out on bail can affect the trial
The court had also stated that Sonam had confirmed before the magistrate receiving the grounds for arrest and related documents. Even if there is any deficiency in the arrest process, the investigating agency can re-arrest if needed.
The bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice P.B. Varale had said that Sonam’s bail applications have already been rejected on merit and the trial has commenced. In such a situation, at this stage, the accused being out on bail can affect the trial.
With these observations, the Court, while quashing the High Court’s bail order, directed Sonam to surrender within three weeks. In this case, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta represented the Meghalaya government.
