The Supreme Court denied extension of Pawan Khera’s transit bail and directed him to approach the Gauhati High Court. The Court stressed that his anticipatory bail plea must be decided independently on merits in Assam.
The Supreme Court of India on Friday refused to extend the transit anticipatory bail earlier granted to Congress leader Pawan Khera by the Telangana High Court in a case filed by the Assam Police. The case involves serious allegations including defamation, forgery, and criminal conspiracy.
A Bench comprising Justices JK Maheshwari and AS Chandurkar made it clear that Khera must approach the appropriate court in Assam for any further relief.
The Court said,
“You go and file a petition in Assam. The court will take up,”
indicating that the matter should be handled by the jurisdictional High Court.
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta pointed out procedural concerns and stated,
“Additional pleadings have been introduced in the application.”
Appearing for Khera, Senior Advocate Abhishek Singhvi submitted,
“If the bench permits, I would like to begin with my application. The earlier order was passed ex parte. This is a transit bail matter and it expires today, while the Court will next sit on Monday.”
Justice JK Maheshwari then asked Singhvi to examine certain documents, observing that the submissions were being made based on details relating to the address of Khera’s wife.
The Supreme Court also closed Khera’s application which challenged its earlier order staying the transit anticipatory bail granted by the Telangana High Court. At the same time, the Court clarified that if Khera files an anticipatory bail application before a competent court in Assam, it must be decided independently.
The Bench stated,
“When the respondent files an application seeking anticipatory bail before the competent court, such court shall not be influenced by the order granting transit bail or staying transit bail by this court. The application shall be considered on its own merits. In case the court is not functioning, a request will be made to take up with the matter, which will be considered in accordance with law.”
The case originates from a complaint registered by the Assam Police after Khera made allegations against Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma and his wife Riniki Bhuyan. Khera had claimed that Sarma’s wife possessed multiple foreign passports and had undisclosed assets abroad. Based on these claims, the police registered a case against him.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Showdown: Assam Govt Challenges Pawan Khera’s Bail in Big Political Case
As per reports, the Assam Police visited Khera’s residence in Delhi on April 7, but he was not present at the time. Following this, Khera approached the Telangana High Court, which granted him transit anticipatory bail on April 10. This relief was given to protect him from arrest temporarily, allowing him time to approach courts in Assam.
However, on April 15, the Supreme Court stayed the Telangana High Court’s order. Khera then moved the Supreme Court again, seeking a stay on that decision and requesting an extension of his transit bail.
During the hearing, Khera’s counsel, Senior Advocate AM Singhvi, argued that the protection granted by the Telangana High Court was about to expire and requested a short extension. He pointed out that courts would remain closed over the weekend and said,
“I am asking only for transit bail to be extended to Tuesday.”
The Bench, however, questioned why Khera had approached the Telangana High Court in the first place instead of directly going to a court in Assam.
The judges asked,
“Why in Telangana? Why not in Assam?”
In response, Singhvi explained that Khera has connections to Hyderabad through his wife. He said,
“I have my matrimonial home in Hyderabad. I visit there all the time.”
The Court was not fully convinced and asked whether these facts were properly mentioned in the original plea. The Bench questioned,
“Where have you mentioned all these things (in the transit bail plea)?”
Singhvi replied that the necessary corrections had been made during the hearing and submitted to the court. He said,
“The correction was made in the court. The document was handed over. And the judge records it. This is a technical trap for the unwary in a liberty matter.”
He further appealed to the Court for temporary protection, stressing the urgency of the situation. Singhvi argued,
“Today is Friday. I am filing on Monday (in Assam). Your lordships can’t protect me till Tuesday? Am I a hardened criminal? Your lordships were misled. I made a small error of filing a wrong document.”
However, the Court did not agree with this reasoning and questioned the seriousness of the error. The judges responded,
“How can you say it’s a small error?”
In conclusion, the Supreme Court refused to grant any further extension of transit anticipatory bail and reiterated that Khera must seek relief from the appropriate court in Assam. The State of Assam was represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta during the proceedings.
Read Live Coverage:
Click Here to Read More Reports on Assam Govt
Click Here to Read More Reports On Pawan Khera
