Can mere mention of a wrong provision of law in an arrest memo, specifically a typographical error, be sufficient to invalidate the arrest of an accused?Faced with this legal question in the case of Sonam Raghuvanshi, who allegedly murdered her husband during their honeymoon in Meghalaya in 2025, the Supreme Court on Thursday hinted at referring the issue to a larger Bench for an authoritative pronouncement.A Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar said it would examine if the Meghalaya High Court was justified in granting bail to Raghuvanshi on the ground that the arrest memo contained a typographical error.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. Police alleged that Raja was killed with the help of her lover 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.The Meghalaya Government has challenged the June 29 order of the Meghalaya High Court which upheld a trial court order granting bail to Raghuvanshi.Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Meghalaya Government, wondered if mere mention of a wrong provision in an arrest memo, specifically a typographical error, was sufficient to invalidate an arrest and entitle the accused to bail in the “shocking” murder case.The Meghalaya High Court granted bail to Raghuvanshi on the ground that the police failed to supply proper written grounds of arrest and that there was a “total non-application of judicious mind” as the memo cited Section 403 (which does not exist in the context) instead of Section 103(1) (murder) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).“In this matter, this is a very serious case where bail is granted on the grounds that grounds (of arrest) were not supplied… though at the time of arrest, there is a record that there is a supply of grounds,” Mehta submitted.“We will consider this matter at length. We will decide whether this requires to be referred to a larger Bench… If this ground is not sustainable, then the bail order goes,”Justice Misra said.The Bench asked Mehta to furnish legible photocopies of documents supplied to the accused and posted the matter for further hearing on July 14.On July 3, another Bench led by Justice MM Jattvibedresh had refused to stay the high court order granting bail to Raghuvanshi, noting she had already been released from jail even as it expressed reservation over the high court order.