Supreme Court Grants Bail to Congress Leader Pawan Khera in Defamation Case

Legal Victory for Pawan Khera

On Friday, senior Congress leader Pawan Khera achieved a significant legal victory as the Supreme Court granted him pre-arrest bail in a criminal defamation and forgery case filed by the Assam police. This case stems from a complaint lodged by Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, the wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. The Supreme Court bench noted that both Khera and the complainant's husband had exchanged allegations against each other.

The court emphasized that an individual's personal liberty, protected under Article 21 of the Constitution, should not be jeopardized lightly.

Court's Ruling and Conditions

In its ruling, the Supreme Court stated, "At this stage, we are aware that the personal liberty of an individual, safeguarded under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, cannot be put at risk lightly."

The bench, comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Atul Chandurkar, heard the case after the Guwahati High Court had dismissed Khera's plea for anticipatory bail.

The court ordered that if Khera is arrested, he should be released on bail, subject to conditions deemed appropriate by the investigating officer.

Cooperation with Investigation Required

Additionally, the court instructed Khera to cooperate with the investigation and appear before the police whenever required. He was also warned against attempting to tamper with evidence or leave the country without prior permission from the competent court.

The Supreme Court clarified that the trial court has the authority to impose any additional conditions during the trial if deemed necessary.

Background of the Case

This case relates to Khera's allegations that Riniki Bhuyan Sarma possesses multiple foreign passports and has financial interests abroad.

Last week, the Supreme Court reserved its judgment. During that hearing, Khera's lawyer, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, argued that there was no risk of his client fleeing and that he was fully cooperating with the investigation.

Singhvi questioned, "Why is it necessary to humiliate someone by detaining them for questioning?" He stressed that this matter is merely about defamation.

Developing Story

This is a developing story and will be updated as more information becomes available.