In a major setback to Pawan Khera, the Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the one-week transit anticipatory bail granted to the Congress leader by the Telangana High Court in a case registered by Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma’s wife Riniki Bhuyan Sarma.
Last Friday, the Telangana High Court granted a one-week anticipatory bail to Khera, with a bench of Justice K Sujana allowing him time to approach the appropriate forum for anticipatory bail, noting that he could move within a week.
The court, however, declined a request by Khera’s counsel for more time, observing that the Congress leader had already acted swiftly in moving the court and was “not an ordinary person”.
The case arises from a complaint filed in Assam following allegations made by Khera against Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma and his wife Riniki Bhuyan Sarma.
Khera, at a press conference on April 5, had alleged that Riniki Bhuyan Sarma held multiple passports and owned foreign assets that were not disclosed in the Chief Minister’s election affidavit.
Based on these allegations, an FIR was registered in Guwahati, prompting legal proceedings against the Congress leader.
While pausing the Telangana High Court order, the Supreme Court clarified that its order would not prevent Khera from seeking anticipatory bail before a competent court in Assam.
“If the petitioner applies for anticipatory bail before the court having jurisdiction in Assam, the order passed today will not have any adverse effect,” the bench observed, ensuring that legal remedies remain open to him in the appropriate jurisdiction.
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Assam government, argued that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to grant transit anticipatory bail in a case where the alleged offence took place in Assam.
He contended that Khera should have approached courts in Assam instead of seeking relief from a court outside the territorial jurisdiction of the case.
The Assam government also raised concerns regarding documents submitted by Khera while seeking relief. It was alleged that the Aadhaar card presented contained discrepancies, with the front page bearing Khera’s name while the address on the reverse side corresponded to his wife.
The state argued that such submissions were used to establish jurisdiction before the Telangana High Court.
Taking note of these submissions, the Supreme Court said the matter warranted further examination and issued notice to Khera.
The court also recorded that Khera had initially secured a seven-day interim relief and subsequently sought an extension of three weeks from the Telangana High Court.
The development marks a setback for Khera, as the interim protection granted earlier now stands suspended. With the Supreme Court’s intervention, the focus shifts to whether Khera will approach a competent court in Assam for anticipatory bail.
The matter will now be heard after three weeks, following Khera’s response to the notice issued by the Supreme Court.
Until then, the legal proceedings remain active, with the jurisdictional question and the validity of the Telangana High Court’s order set to be examined in detail.
– Ends
With agency inputs
