The Supreme Court of India on Thursday, April 30 reserved its decision on a pre-arrest bail plea filed by Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera in connection with a case registered by Assam Police following a complaint by Riniki Bhuyan Sharma.
The matter was heard by a bench of Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Atul Chandurkar after the Gauhati High Court had earlier declined to grant Khera anticipatory bail.
At the centre of the dispute are remarks attributed to Khera alleging that Riniki Bhuyan Sharma held multiple foreign passports and had business interests overseas. Challenging the need for arrest, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Khera, told the court that the case was rooted in defamation and did not warrant custodial interrogation.
He argued that Khera had cooperated with the process and posed no risk of evading investigation. Singhvi also took exception to what he described as aggressive police action, claiming a large contingent of Assam Police personnel had reached Khera’s Delhi residence. He further criticised certain public statements allegedly made by Himanta Biswa Sarma, saying they contributed to fears of arrest.
The defence also questioned aspects of the High Court’s order, including its reference to a provision of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita not mentioned in the FIR, and remarks that appeared to favour the complainant at a preliminary stage.
Opposing the plea, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the bench that the allegations made by Khera were backed by documents that were allegedly fabricated. He argued that investigators needed custodial access to determine how the documents were created, who was involved, and whether there were wider implications.
The Assam government maintained that the case involved serious offences such as forgery and the use of fake documents, going beyond a simple defamation claim. It also alleged that Khera had not made himself readily available to investigators.
The FIR, registered with the Guwahati Crime Branch, invokes provisions relating to false statements linked to elections, cheating, forgery, and defamation under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Earlier, Khera had obtained temporary protection from arrest from the Telangana High Court, but the Supreme Court later withdrew that relief and directed him to seek remedy before the appropriate forum in Assam. His subsequent plea was rejected by the Gauhati High Court, which held that custodial interrogation was necessary given the nature of the allegations.