Raja Raghuvanshi Murder: Shillong Court Rejects Bail Pleas Of 4 Accused Including Raj Kushwaha

Indore (Madhya Pradesh): The Shillong Sessions Court rejected the bail pleas of four main accused in Indore businessman Raja Raghuvanshi's murder case.

A detailed order of this verdict was issued on the following day, Friday.

In their petitions, the four accused, including Raj Kushwaha, had argued that their case has the same basis as Sonam Raghuvanshi's-- delay in trial and non-compliance with due process. He also claimed that he was not informed about the reasons for the arrest. However, the court rejected all his arguments.

Law experts said that it is difficult to get bail for these four accused after the court order. In such a case, they will not be able to come out of jail for a long time.

Notably, a few days ago the Meghalaya government approached the High Court against the bail granted to primary accused Sonam Raghuvanshi. The case will be heard on May 12.

Raj Kushwaha's Bail Rejected: Raj's lawyer argued that Sonam Raghuvanshi, another prime accused in the same case, has already got bail, so Raj should also get bail. There are a total of 90 witnesses in the case, of which only 4 have testified so far. The lawyer said that Raj was not present at the scene of the incident, no weapon was recovered from him and he has only been implicated on suspicion of conspiracy. Such long imprisonment is a violation of Article 21 (Right to Life and Freedom).

Vishal Singh Chauhan: The lawyer argued that another accused in the same case, Sonam Raghuvanshi, has already been granted bail by the court. Since Vishal's role is the same, he should also get bail. The lawyer said that Vishal was not present at the scene of the incident and has been implicated only on the basis of conspiracy, for which there is no concrete evidence. There are 90 witnesses in the case and only 4 have testified so far, which will take a long time to complete the trial.

Akash Singh Rajput: The lawyer argued that the accused has been in jail for a long time and keeping him in jail for so long is a violation of his fundamental rights (Article 21). There is no direct evidence against the accused and no weapon has been recovered from his possession. Citing "equality", the lawyer said that Sonam Raghuvanshi, another accused in the same case, has already got bail, so Akash should also get bail.

Anand Kurmi: The lawyer argued that the accused has been in jail for a long time, which is a violation of his rights. There is no solid evidence against him. Sonam Raghuvanshi, another prime accused, has already got bail, so on the basis of equality, Anand should also get bail.