In a significant ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has issued a directive to local authorities, explicitly prohibiting the burning of effigies depicting Sonam Raghuvanshi or any other individuals during the upcoming Dasara celebrations in Indore. This decision comes amidst public outrage surrounding the Meghalaya honeymoon murder case.
Sonam Raghuvanshi is currently facing charges in connection with the alleged murder of her husband, Raja Raghuvanshi. Raja’s disappearance during their honeymoon in Meghalaya on May 23 led to the discovery of his mutilated body on June 2 in a deep ravine near a waterfall in the Sohra area. Investigators have since arrested Sonam and several others, including her alleged boyfriend, for their suspected involvement in the crime. The case has garnered considerable media attention, with Raja Raghuvanshi’s family publicly demanding the death penalty for those involved, and police confirming Sonam’s confession to her role in the conspiracy.
The controversy escalated when ‘Paurush,’ a social organization based in Indore, announced its intention to prepare an 11-headed ‘Surpanakha dahan’ effigy for Dasara. This effigy was planned to feature images of women accused of grave crimes, such as the murders of their husbands, children, or in-laws, with Sonam Raghuvanshi specifically named among them.
However, a single bench of Justice Pranay Verma, on September 28, 2025, declared such an act impermissible within a democratic nation like India. The court firmly stated that allowing the effigy burning would constitute a violation of fundamental rights, specifically Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, which guarantee equality before the law and the right to life and personal liberty.
The High Court’s order was issued following a petition filed by Sangeeta Raghuvanshi, Sonam’s mother, who argued against the organization’s plans. She contended that burning her daughter’s effigy, even while she is an accused, would inflict severe and lasting damage to her family’s dignity, amounting to an unlawful and unconstitutional act of public humiliation. Such an act, she argued, could malign their image and infringe upon their right to privacy.
Despite the state counsel’s submission that an inquiry would be conducted, the court reviewed pamphlets and other evidence presented by the petitioner, finding the organization’s intentions clear and unacceptable.
Speaking to PTI, Sangeeta Raghuvanshi confirmed the court’s directive, stating that the district collector, police commissioner, and the station house officer have been instructed to prevent any effigy burning and to halt any unlawful acts that could tarnish her family’s reputation. The court’s prohibition extends beyond Sonam Raghuvanshi to include effigies of any women facing criminal charges from other states, reinforcing the principle that such practices are not acceptable in a democratic society.
Ashok Dashor, convener of ‘Paurush’, had previously justified the planned effigy burning as a symbolic act to destroy ‘negative qualities like adultery, immorality, lack of values, and indecency,’ drawing comparisons to mythological narratives. Nevertheless, he confirmed that the organization would comply with the High Court’s order.