The Supreme Court on Friday declined to extend Congress leader Pawan Khera’s transit anticipatory bail, effectively asking him to seek relief from courts in Assam in the case linked to his allegations against Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma’s wife.
In a development that tightens the legal timeline for Khera, the apex court made it clear that the matter must now be pursued before the competent court in Assam, while also underlining that earlier bail orders will not influence the final decision.
“The court deciding the application shall not be adversely influenced by any order granting transit bail or otherwise. This means that when an application seeking anticipatory bail is filed before the competent court, such court shall decide the plea on its own merits, uninfluenced by any prior order. In view of the above, the respondent is at liberty to approach the appropriate court. In case the court is not functioning, a request may be made to the court registry, and the same shall act in accordance with the law. With the aforesaid observations, the plea stands disposed of”, the Court noted.
Top court asks Khera to move Assam court, no interim relief
A Bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and Atul S Chandurkar refused to grant any interim protection from arrest or extend the relief till Tuesday, as sought by Khera’s counsel.
“The respondent is at liberty to move the (Guwahati) High Court… The application shall be considered on its own merits,” the court said, adding that the Assam court “shall not be influenced” either by the Telangana High Court’s transit bail order or by the Supreme Court’s earlier stay on it.
The Bench also clarified that if the jurisdictional court is not functioning, Khera can seek urgent listing through the registry, which would act in accordance with law.
Bench questions conduct, rejects plea for extension
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Khera, urged the court to grant protection till Tuesday, arguing that the earlier stay order was passed ex parte and that the one-week bail granted by the Telangana High Court was expiring on Friday.
“Your lordships have been persuaded to pass an ex parte order… I am filing on Monday (in Assam). Your lordships can’t protect me till Tuesday? Am I a hardened criminal?” Singhvi submitted.
The court, however, was not convinced and raised concerns over the manner in which the Telangana High Court’s jurisdiction was invoked.
“You say you have been fair… we are saying it is not,” the Bench observed, referring to the use of an Aadhaar card in the proceedings.
When Singhvi said the issue had been corrected during the hearing in the High Court, the Bench responded that such corrections could not cure an initial filing allegedly based on incorrect material. “How can you say this is a small mistake?” the court asked.
FIR in Assam and ‘AI-generated’ claims
The case stems from an FIR filed in Assam over Khera’s remarks against Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, wife of Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma.
Khera had alleged that she held multiple passports, including from India, the UAE and Egypt, and owned undisclosed luxury properties in Dubai along with a company in Wyoming, US.
The Sarma family has denied these claims, calling the documents “AI-generated fabrications” circulated by Pakistani social media groups.
Earlier relief and Supreme Court’s intervention
On April 10, the Telangana High Court had granted Khera transit anticipatory bail for one week, allowing him time to approach the appropriate court in Assam.
However, the Assam Police challenged this order before the Supreme Court, arguing that the alleged offence and FIR were both linked to Guwahati.
Earlier this week, the apex court had stayed the Telangana High Court’s order, observing that the petition appeared to rely on “fabricated documents” to create jurisdiction.
The Solicitor General had also termed the move as “forum choosing”.
What the Supreme Court clarified
While refusing to extend relief, the Supreme Court emphasised that both the Telangana High Court’s order granting bail and its own stay order would not prejudice the Assam court’s decision.
“The court deciding the application shall not be adversely influenced by any order granting transit bail or otherwise,” it said.
With this, the plea seeking extension of transit bail was disposed of, leaving Khera to pursue anticipatory bail before the Assam court.