NEW DELHI – The Supreme Court has reserved its verdict on the anticipatory bail plea of Congress leader Pawan Khera regarding a defamation and forgery case filed by the Guwahati Police. The case stems from allegations Khera made against Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma.
Appearing for Khera, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi challenged the necessity of arrest, emphasizing that his client is not a “hardened criminal” and that personal liberty under Article 21 must be upheld.
Arguments on Custodial Interrogation
The legal battle focused on whether the Congress leader needs to be taken into custody for questioning:
-
Defense Contentions: Singhvi argued that the charges—primarily related to defamation and reputational damage—do not warrant custodial interrogation. He criticized the Gauhati High Court’s earlier observation that Khera was a “flight risk.”
-
State’s Response: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the State of Assam, insisted that custody is essential to trace the source of documents and photographs Khera used to allege that Riniki Sarma held multiple passports and undisclosed foreign assets. Mehta further alluded to potential “foreign interference” in the recent Assam elections.
Background of the Dispute
The controversy began following an April 4 press conference where Khera alleged that Riniki Bhuyan Sarma possessed passports from three different countries and owned illegal properties in Dubai. The Sarma family has dismissed these claims as “AI-generated fabrications” and filed a formal complaint leading to charges of cheating and forgery.
The bench, comprising Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Atul Chandurkar, will now deliberate on whether to grant protection from arrest or uphold the High Court’s decision requiring Khera’s presence for interrogation.
