Our Supreme Court just delivered a verdict in favour of the freedom of a leading politician. On April 30, 2026, Pawan Khera, a Congress leader, got anticipatory bail from the Supreme Court. The Assam Police had filed a high-profile forgery and defamation case against him, seeking to immediately arrest him. The judgment was made by Justices JK Maheshwari and AS Chandurkar. They had set aside an earlier order of the Gauhati High Court, which had summarily rejected his plea
The Story Behind the Press Conferences
The case began early last month. On April 5, Khera had two sensational press conferences. One at New Delhi and the other in Guwahati hotel. At these press conferences, he displayed some papers on a big screen. Riniki Bhuyan Sarma was the main target of his accusations. The wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma.
Foreign Passport Bombshell Claims
In these media appearances, Khera made some big allegations about the Chief Minister’s family. According to him, Riniki Bhuyan Sarma had three foreign passports. The passports were from Egypt, UAE and Antigua & Barbuda. He alleged they were valid and hadn’t expired. He went on to ramp up the allegations, claiming foreign financial interests
Allegations of Hidden US Assets
The Congress spokesperson didn’t end at international passports. He alleged the Chief Minister’s wife owned a company in Wyoming. He said this US company had investments to the tune of more than Rs 50,000 crores. He also claimed that she had hidden properties in Dubai. He strongly emphasised that none of this was reflected in the election affidavits filed by her husband
The Midnight FIR in Guwahati
The response from Assam was swift and furious. Riniki Bhuyan Sarma vigorously rejected the allegations and went to the police. She said the documents and QR codes presented at the media briefings were all fake. Guwahati’s Crime Branch filed an FIR just after midnight on April 6. The police registered several serious offences under the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita law against the politician.
Delhi Police Charges and Arrest
The police chargesheet contained severe charges of forgery, cheating and false declaration. For instance, sections 338 for forging valuable security and 318 for cheating were applied to him. On April 7, a large team from Assam Police raided Khera’s New Delhi home. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi told the media that about 50 to 60 people arrived at his house. They were there to arrest him, but Khera was not present.
The Inter-State Legal Hopscotch Begins
Confronted with the threat of arrest, Khera sought immediate recourse. He first went to the Telangana High Court given he had come to Hyderabad immediately after the press conferences. On April 10, it granted him a transit anticipatory bail for a week. The Assam government immediately moved to the Supreme Court to seek to overturn this interim bail. On April 15, the apex court stayed the transit bail and asked him to seek bail in the local court.
Dispiriting Gauhati High Court experience
Khera moved the Gauhati High Court as per the direction of the Supreme Court. He didn’t have much luck in this leg of his legal fight. His pleas for anticipatory bail were dismissed by the High Court on April 24. They felt there was more to the case than just political defamation. They concurred with the state police that the interrogation of the accused in jail was essential to uncovering the source of the fake documents.
The Supreme Court’s Final Appeal
Khera immediately filed an appeal in the Supreme Court. The supreme court had a heated debate between the two sides and reserved its order. Singhvi put up an aggressive argument for Khera, and accused the Assam Chief Minister of playing the role of a Constitutional Rambo. He said the machinery of the state was being used to put his client to shame. He emphasised that Khera was a political player who was actively responding to a political situation, not a criminal on the run.
The State Wants Interrogation in Custody
The Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta, battled for the Assam government. He claimed Khera was “absconding” since the FIR was lodged. Mehta said the police investigation demonstrated the passport photos released to the media were a hoax. He claimed the police had to question Khera in custody. They wanted to know his associates and whether they got any support from abroad to forge the documents.
The Supreme Court Calls Out the Political Jealousy
The Supreme Court judges were not convinced by the plea of the State for police custody. The court observed that the whole case was tainted by political feuding. They added the allegations and counter-allegations were obviously politically inspired. The court highlighted the Gauhati High Court had committed a grave mistake in turning the burden of proof on its head. Liberty is a higher value and not to be lightly interfered with.
The Unparliamentary Remarks Noted by the Bench
The long judgment also noted the political background to the police action. The Supreme Court recorded that Khera and the Chief Minister had been throwing heavy political dirt at each other for some time. They noted in particular that the Chief Minister of Assam had made some unparliamentary comments about Khera. It felt this was evidence of an attempt to intimidate him with an arrest. This particular aspect was crucial in their decision-making process.
Conditions for Pawan Khera’s Bail
The Supreme Court imposed certain conditions when it granted anticipatory bail. First, the judges asked Khera to fully assist in the police investigation. He must attend the office of the investigating officer in Assam when asked to answer questions. He must not leave the country without the permission of the judiciary. He was also directed to not tamper with any evidence or influence witnesses.
The Balance Between Investigation and Liberty
The case underlines an important jurisprudence on the state’s power to arrest. The judges noted that there is a need to balance the state’s need to conduct a proper investigation and citizens’ constitutional rights. The citizens’ right to personal liberty is enshrined under Article 21. The Court opined that the authenticity of Khera’s documents can be easily proven during the trial that’s to come. He should not be thrown in jail just now.
