The Supreme Court has granted anticipatory bail to Congress leader Pawan Khera, providing relief in a case involving allegations of multiple foreign passports held by Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, the wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma.
Supreme Court Reverses High Court Decision
A bench consisting of Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice AS Chandurkar ruled that the Gauhati High Court’s previous dismissal of Khera’s bail application was erroneous
. The Supreme Court observed that the High Court failed to correctly appreciate the material on record and improperly shifted the burden of proof onto the accused.
The Court further noted that the allegations and counter-allegations between the parties prima facie appear to be politically motivated and seemingly influenced by such rivalry
. The justices determined that the situation did not warrant custodial interrogation and that the truth of the claims could be established during a trial.
The bench highlighted that the right to personal liberty is a cherished fundamental right
and any deprivation must meet a higher threshold, especially when political overtones are present. The Court also pointed out that the High Court wrongly referenced Section 339 of the BNS despite the FIR containing no such allegations.
Legal Battle and Political Context
The proceedings began after an FIR was lodged by Riniki Bhuyan Sarma at the Guwahati Crime Branch Police Station. The complaint followed public claims by Khera that Sharma held multiple foreign passports and possessed financial interests abroad.
The legal journey involved multiple jurisdictions. On April 10, the Telangana High Court granted Khera one week of transit anticipatory bail. Still, on April 15, the Supreme Court stayed that operation, directing Khera to seek relief from the competent court in Assam.
The Gauhati High Court initially rejected Khera’s plea, asserting that custodial interrogation was necessary to find the source of his documents. It remarked that Khera had failed to substantiate his claims and had drawn a private individual into a political controversy.
Conditions of Release
While granting bail, the Supreme Court imposed several mandates to ensure the integrity of the investigation. Khera is required to cooperate with the investigating officer and appear whenever required.
Khera is prohibited from leaving India without prior permission from the Court. He is also under regular conditions to ensure he does not tamper with any evidence.
The Court also recorded that the Chief Minister of Assam had used unparliamentary remarks
against Khera and had threatened his arrest. The justices emphasized that a balance must be struck between a fair investigation and the fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Potential Next Steps
With anticipatory bail granted, the investigation by the Assam Police may continue with Khera’s cooperation. The veracity of the passport and financial allegations could be tested during the trial process. Depending on the findings, the case may proceed toward a formal trial or further legal challenges by either party.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did the Supreme Court grant Pawan Khera anticipatory bail?
The Court found that the Gauhati High Court’s decision was erroneous and that the allegations appeared to be politically motivated, meaning custodial interrogation was not warranted to test the veracity of the claims.
What were the specific allegations that led to the FIR?
The FIR was lodged by Riniki Bhuyan Sarma after Pawan Khera made public claims that she held multiple foreign passports and had financial interests abroad.
What restrictions did the Court place on Pawan Khera?
Khera must cooperate with the investigation, appear before the investigating officer when required, refrain from tampering with evidence, and cannot leave India without the Court’s prior leave.
Do you believe that political rivalry should be a primary consideration when courts decide on anticipatory bail?
