Supreme Court Denies Congress Leader Pawan Khera's Bail Request Amid Controversy

In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court denied Congress leader Pawan Khera's request for bail in a defamation case linked to comments about the wife of Assam's Chief Minister. The court's decision raises significant questions regarding jurisdiction and the legal strategies employed by Khera's defense. As the situation unfolds, Khera is urged to seek remedies in Assam's competent court. This case highlights the complexities of legal proceedings involving political figures and the implications of alleged fabricated documents. Stay tuned for further developments on this intriguing legal battle.

By Narendra Chaudhary Apr 17, 2026, 14:06 IST

Supreme Court's Ruling on Pawan Khera's Bail

New Delhi: In a significant legal setback, the Supreme Court on Friday denied Congress leader Pawan Khera's request for protection from arrest, as well as his plea to extend the transit anticipatory bail related to an FIR filed in Assam. This FIR pertains to his alleged defamatory comments about the wife of Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma.

A bench comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar ruled against granting any interim protection and advised Khera to seek anticipatory bail from the appropriate court in Assam, rejecting his appeal for an extension until Tuesday.

The court stated, "The respondent is free to approach the (Guwahati) High Court... The application will be evaluated on its own merits," emphasizing that the Assam court should not be swayed by the transit bail granted by the Telangana High Court or any previous Supreme Court orders.

Justice Maheshwari's bench also noted that if the jurisdictional court is unavailable, Khera could request an urgent hearing, which would be considered according to legal protocols.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Khera, urged the Supreme Court to maintain protection until Tuesday, arguing that the previous order halting transit bail was issued without Khera's presence and that the one-week protection from the Telangana High Court was expiring on Friday. Singhvi expressed concern that the court had been misled and described the submission of an incorrect document as a minor oversight.

However, the Supreme Court appeared unsympathetic to Khera's arguments and scrutinized his actions.

The bench remarked on the use of an Aadhaar card to establish jurisdiction in the Telangana High Court, stating, "You claim to have acted fairly... we disagree."

When Singhvi argued that the erroneous document was corrected during the Telangana High Court proceedings, the bench countered that such a correction could not rectify the initial submission based on allegedly falsified information.

The court questioned, "How can you dismiss this as a minor error?" and ultimately denied interim relief, instructing Khera to pursue immediate remedies in the Assam court.

Earlier in the week, the Supreme Court had suspended the Telangana High Court's order that had granted Khera a one-week transit anticipatory bail, indicating that his petition seemed to rely on "fabricated documents" to establish jurisdiction.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta contended that Khera's actions amounted to "forum shopping," given that both the alleged offense and the FIR were registered in Guwahati.

While acknowledging the Assam government's plea, the Supreme Court clarified that Khera was free to seek anticipatory bail from the competent court in Assam, and that such a request would be evaluated independently, without influence from its interim order.

On April 10, the Telangana High Court had granted Khera transit anticipatory bail for one week to allow him to approach the relevant court in Assam regarding the FIR linked to his alleged defamatory statements about Riniki Bhuyan Sarma.

The Assam Police have charged Khera under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including defamation, forgery, and criminal conspiracy, following his claims that Riniki Bhuyan Sarma held multiple foreign passports, undeclared luxury properties in Dubai, and shell companies in the United States.