Indicating that it contemplated cancelling the bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, who allegedly murdered her husband Raja Raghuvanshi during their honeymoon in Meghalaya in 2025, the Supreme Court on Tuesday suggested to her to surrender pending the examination of key witnesses during the trial.While hearing the Meghalaya Government’s petition changing the state high court’s June 29 order upholding the bail granted to Sonam by a trial court, a Bench led by Justice MM Jattvibedresh asked her counsel if she was willing to surrender, pending consideration of her bail.”There are two options. Either we will consider and pass an order on merits or we will pass an order for you to surrender in the interregnum till witnesses are examined… Then we will see it on merits. We are putting it to you because we don’t want to catch you by surprise… At the same time you should also understand our mind. Take instructions and come back,” a Bench led by Justice MM Jattvibedresh said.“I think the second option is better for you. If you want to argue further, we will hear you and then decide one way or the other. If the second option is taken, we will issue directions to the trial court to examine the public witnesses and then we will take up the bail application,” the Bench said.”This doesn’t require much argument. If you want to argue further, we will hear you. Hopefully, you’ll be able to take a correct stand,” said the Bench which also included Justice PB Varale.The Bench also questioned her conduct and the timing of the challenge to her arrest.“Your conduct itself… How do you explain? The case of the prosecution is that you along with the deceased went to that place. That is the foundational fact… So, we will not go into the other issues. Number two, regarding the grounds of arrest, did you raise it at the earliest point of time?” the Bench asked.The top court wondered if the clerical error in the arrest memo formed the basis of the high court’s bail order. “How does the reasoning given by the high court that Section 403 is Section 103 matter at this stage?” it asked.On behalf of the Meghalaya Government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that Sonam was fully aware of the reasons for her arrest and that the challenge was directed against the grant of bail rather than its cancellation. The mention of “Section 403” of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita instead of Section 103 in the arrest memo was merely a typographical error and could not amount to non-supply of grounds of arrest, Mehta said.The Supreme Court on July 3 refused to stay the Meghalaya High Court’s order granting bail to Sonam, even as it expressed reservation over the high court order.Sonam – a resident of Indore in Madhya Pradesh — is accused of conspiring to kill her husband, Raja, while they were on honeymoon in East Khasi Hills in May 2025.The police alleged that Raja was killed with the help of her paramour Raj Kushwaha and three others. Sonam, who was arrested in June 2025, has since been released on bail. She is facing trial in a court in Meghalaya.”These incidents are rising,” Mehta had said earlier, referring to the Lohagad case in which a woman allegedly killed her fiancée.”These incidents are rising,” Mehta said, referring to the Lohagad case, in which a woman allegedly killed her fiancée.