The Crossbill News Desk
Relief came for Congress leader Pawan Khera after the Supreme Court of India granted him anticipatory bail in a case registered by the Assam Police on a complaint filed by Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma.
The FIR stemmed from allegations made by Khera ahead of the Assam Assembly elections claiming that Sarma’s wife possessed multiple passports.
According to Live Law, a Bench comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and A.S. Chandurkar had reserved its verdict on April 30 while hearing Khera’s appeal challenging the dismissal of his anticipatory bail plea by the Gauhati High Court. The judgment was delivered the following morning.
The Supreme Court observed that the high court’s findings were “not based on correct appreciation of all the material which has been placed on record and appears to be erroneous, in particular shifting the burden on the accused.”
The Bench also held that the high court erred in making observations regarding an offence under Section 339 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita despite the FIR containing no such allegation. It further remarked that such conclusions could not have been drawn merely on submissions made by the Advocate General.
Granting relief, the top court noted that the allegations and counter-allegations prima facie “appear to be politically motivated and seemingly influenced by such rivalry, rather than disclosing a situation warranting custodial interrogation, and the veracity of the allegations can be tested at trial.”
Emphasising constitutional safeguards, the Bench stated, “The right to personal liberty is a cherished fundamental right, and any deprivation thereof must be justified on a higher threshold, particularly where the surrounding circumstances may indicate the presence of political overtones,” while directing that Khera be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest.
The judgment also recorded that Sarma had made certain “unparliamentary remarks” against Khera, including threats of arrest.
At the same time, the Court directed the Congress leader to cooperate fully with the investigation, appear before the investigating officer whenever required, refrain from leaving India without prior court permission, and avoid tampering with evidence.
“At this stage, we are cognizant of the fact that personal liberty of an individual enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India cannot be put to jeopardy lightly. But at the same time, we are also of the view that for any offences as alleged in the FIR, the investigation should be completed with integrity and in full swing with co-operation of the Appellant,” the court said.
It further added, “Having regard to the aforesaid considerations, we are of the opinion that while adjudicating an application for anticipatory bail, a careful balance must be struck between the State’s interest in ensuring a fair investigation and the individual’s fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
The legal battle followed a political confrontation ahead of the elections when Khera, at a press conference in Delhi on April 5, displayed copies of passports he alleged were issued to Sarma’s wife by the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Antigua and Barbuda, each showing validity periods extending to 2027, 2029 and 2031. He had demanded that the Chief Minister be disqualified from contesting the April 9 polls and be “arrested” for allegedly failing to disclose his wife’s assets.
Rejecting the accusations, Sarma termed the documents questionable and pointed to discrepancies in the passport photographs, claiming the spelling “Sarma” was used instead of the “official” surname “Sharma” followed by his wife. He also alleged that the material circulated by the Congress had originated from a Pakistani social media group.
With anticipatory bail now granted, the case will proceed through investigation and trial, where the veracity of the competing claims will be examined in accordance with law while safeguarding the constitutional protection of personal liberty.
The FIR stemmed from allegations made by Khera ahead of the Assam Assembly elections claiming that Sarma’s wife possessed multiple passports.
According to Live Law, a Bench comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and A.S. Chandurkar had reserved its verdict on April 30 while hearing Khera’s appeal challenging the dismissal of his anticipatory bail plea by the Gauhati High Court. The judgment was delivered the following morning.
The Supreme Court observed that the high court’s findings were “not based on correct appreciation of all the material which has been placed on record and appears to be erroneous, in particular shifting the burden on the accused.”
The Bench also held that the high court erred in making observations regarding an offence under Section 339 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita despite the FIR containing no such allegation. It further remarked that such conclusions could not have been drawn merely on submissions made by the Advocate General.
Granting relief, the top court noted that the allegations and counter-allegations prima facie “appear to be politically motivated and seemingly influenced by such rivalry, rather than disclosing a situation warranting custodial interrogation, and the veracity of the allegations can be tested at trial.”
Emphasising constitutional safeguards, the Bench stated, “The right to personal liberty is a cherished fundamental right, and any deprivation thereof must be justified on a higher threshold, particularly where the surrounding circumstances may indicate the presence of political overtones,” while directing that Khera be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest.
The judgment also recorded that Sarma had made certain “unparliamentary remarks” against Khera, including threats of arrest.
At the same time, the Court directed the Congress leader to cooperate fully with the investigation, appear before the investigating officer whenever required, refrain from leaving India without prior court permission, and avoid tampering with evidence.
“At this stage, we are cognizant of the fact that personal liberty of an individual enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India cannot be put to jeopardy lightly. But at the same time, we are also of the view that for any offences as alleged in the FIR, the investigation should be completed with integrity and in full swing with co-operation of the Appellant,” the court said.
It further added, “Having regard to the aforesaid considerations, we are of the opinion that while adjudicating an application for anticipatory bail, a careful balance must be struck between the State’s interest in ensuring a fair investigation and the individual’s fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
The legal battle followed a political confrontation ahead of the elections when Khera, at a press conference in Delhi on April 5, displayed copies of passports he alleged were issued to Sarma’s wife by the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Antigua and Barbuda, each showing validity periods extending to 2027, 2029 and 2031. He had demanded that the Chief Minister be disqualified from contesting the April 9 polls and be “arrested” for allegedly failing to disclose his wife’s assets.
Rejecting the accusations, Sarma termed the documents questionable and pointed to discrepancies in the passport photographs, claiming the spelling “Sarma” was used instead of the “official” surname “Sharma” followed by his wife. He also alleged that the material circulated by the Congress had originated from a Pakistani social media group.
With anticipatory bail now granted, the case will proceed through investigation and trial, where the veracity of the competing claims will be examined in accordance with law while safeguarding the constitutional protection of personal liberty.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment