‘Politically motivated’: SC grants relief to Congress leader Pawan Khera

The Supreme Court of India on Friday granted anticipatory bail to Pawan Khera in connection with an FIR filed by the Assam Police over his alleged remarks against Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, setting aside an earlier order of the Gauhati High Court that had denied him pre-arrest protection.

A Bench of justices J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar underscored the need to balance investigative powers with individual liberty, observing that “while adjudicating an application for anticipatory bail, a careful balance must be struck between the state’s interest in ensuring a fair investigation and the individual’s fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21”.

In a significant observation, the apex court said the case appeared to carry a political undertone. “The criminal process must be applied with objectivity and circumspection so as to ensure that individual liberty is not imperilled by proceedings that may be coloured by political rivalry,” the Bench noted, adding that the allegations and counter-allegations prima facie seemed “politically motivated” and did not warrant custodial interrogation.

Allowing the appeal, the court directed that Khera be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest, subject to conditions. He has been asked to cooperate with the investigation, appear before authorities when required, refrain from influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence, and not leave the country without prior court permission.

The Bench also found fault with the Gauhati High Court’s reasoning, stating that it had erred in shifting the burden onto the accused and in relying on Section 339 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which was not even invoked in the FIR. “The observations made by the high court… are not based on a correct appreciation of the material on record and appear to be erroneous,” the court said.

During the hearing, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Khera, argued that the case largely pertained to defamation and reputational harm, which did not justify arrest. He contended that Khera was willing to cooperate and posed no flight risk, and that the remarks were part of political discourse during an election campaign.

Opposing the plea, solicitor general Tushar Mehta, representing the Assam government, argued that forged documents had been publicly displayed and that custodial interrogation was necessary to trace their origin and uncover any larger conspiracy.

The case stems from allegations that Khera, during press conferences in Delhi and Guwahati on 5 April, claimed that Riniki Sarma possessed multiple foreign passports and undisclosed overseas assets. She denied the claims and filed a complaint alleging that fabricated documents with forged seals and QR codes were used.

The FIR, registered by the Assam Crime Branch, invokes provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita relating to forgery, cheating, false statements, and defamation. The investigation had included searches at Khera’s Delhi residence and inquiries in Hyderabad.

Earlier, the Gauhati High Court had rejected Khera’s anticipatory bail plea, holding that the matter went beyond “defamation simpliciter” and required custodial interrogation. Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia had observed that Khera had “dragged an innocent lady into the controversy” for political mileage.

Khera subsequently approached the Supreme Court following multiple legal proceedings, including a brief grant of transit anticipatory bail by the Telangana High Court.

Notably, the apex court also took cognisance of public statements made by Himanta Biswa Sarma against Khera, noting that these remarks formed part of the broader political backdrop of the case.

The ruling marks a significant intervention, reinforcing the primacy of personal liberty while allowing the investigation to proceed under judicial safeguards.

With IANS inputs