Guwahati: The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on the anticipatory bail plea filed by Congress leader Pawan Khera in a case registered by the Assam Police.
A Bench comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and A.S. Chandurkar concluded the hearing after considering submissions from Khera’s counsel and the representatives of the Assam Police.
The case arises from allegations made by Khera during a press conference against Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. Khera had claimed that she possessed multiple foreign passports and undisclosed assets in the United States and the UAE.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Khera, argued that the case was driven by political malice. He submitted that the statements, even if disputed, would at best amount to defamation, a bailable offence, and not attract serious charges such as forgery and public mischief.
Singhvi also questioned the need for custodial interrogation, stating that Khera was neither a flight risk nor a threat to the investigation.
Khera moved the apex court after the Gauhati High Court rejected his anticipatory bail plea on April 24. The High Court had observed that custodial interrogation was necessary to identify the source of the allegedly fabricated documents. It also noted that while criticism of a Chief Minister may fall within political discourse, involving a private individual could raise legal concerns.
Appearing for the Assam Police, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed the plea, arguing that the allegations involved forged and fabricated documents. He said passports constituted “valuable security” under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and that the investigation must ascertain the source of the documents and any possible involvement of external elements.
Mehta also submitted that the offences invoked included non-bailable provisions and stressed the need to identify others allegedly involved.
In reply, Singhvi contended that the prosecution had not established any compelling need for arrest and maintained that the case was aimed at humiliating his client.
The court reserved its order after hearing both sides and will decide whether to grant Khera protection from arrest or allow custodial interrogation to proceed.