SC grants anticipatory bail to Pawan Khera, cites political rivalry in Assam defamation case 

Congress leader faces charges over remarks against CM’s wife; top court says liberty must be protected in politically charged complaints

Supreme Court intervenes

The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted anticipatory bail to Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera in a criminal defamation and forgery case registered by Assam Police. A bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and AS Chandurkar set aside the Gauhati High Court’s earlier order that had refused pre-arrest protection to the leader.

The court observed that the circumstances surrounding the case indicated an element of political rivalry, adding that personal liberty cannot be compromised in disputes that appear to stem from electoral or ideological conflict.

Case filed after press conference remarks

The legal trouble for Khera began after he alleged at a recent press conference that Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma’s wife, Riniki Bhuyan, held multiple foreign passports and had undisclosed assets abroad. The complaint, filed by Bhuyan, triggered an FIR that included charges of defamation, forgery, and criminal conspiracy.

Assam Police officials travelled to Khera’s Delhi residence on 7 April, but he was not present at the time. Khera then sought legal recourse through the Telangana High Court, which granted him transit anticipatory bail for one week on 10 April.

Timeline of legal moves

That relief was short-lived. On 15 April, the Supreme Court stayed the Telangana High Court’s order following an appeal from the Assam government. Two days later, the top court refused to extend the transit bail period and directed Khera to approach the Gauhati High Court instead.

Khera complied, arguing in his petition before the Gauhati bench that his statements were made in a political and public context during a press conference. He claimed the FIR was nothing more than an act of political vendetta, especially since the complainant was the Chief Minister’s wife.

High Court had sought custodial interrogation

On 24 April, the Gauhati High Court rejected his plea. In its order, the bench said custodial interrogation was necessary to identify the sources who provided Khera with the documents he had cited. The court also observed that while political criticism of a sitting chief minister might be excusable as political rhetoric, dragging an “innocent woman” into the matter changed the nature of the case.

It clarified that this was not a simple defamation case and noted that Khera had not yet substantiated his claims with evidence.

What the Supreme Court said

After the high court’s refusal, Khera moved the Supreme Court again. The bench on Wednesday said liberty must be protected, especially when the alleged offence is rooted in political rivalry. While the court did not comment on the truth of Khera’s original claims, it made it clear that anticipatory bail should not be denied lightly when personal liberty is at stake.