Assam Government Escalates Legal Battle, Moves Supreme Court Over Pawan Khera's Bail
The Assam government has taken a significant legal step by approaching the Supreme Court to challenge an order from the Telangana High Court. This order granted transit anticipatory bail to Congress media and publicity chairman Pawan Khera in a high-profile case linked to his allegations against Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma's wife, Riniki Bhuyan Sharma.
Background of the Case and Allegations
The controversy stems from a case registered by the Crime Branch of the Guwahati Police Commissionerate, based on a First Information Report (FIR) filed by Riniki Bhuyan Sarma on April 6. The complaint was lodged in response to two press conferences addressed by Pawan Khera—first in Delhi and subsequently in Guwahati. During these events, Khera made serious allegations, claiming that Riniki Bhuyan Sharma holds multiple passports and owns undisclosed properties abroad.
Specific accusations included:
- Allegations that Riniki possesses passports issued by the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Egypt, and Antigua and Barbuda.
- Claims of undisclosed property ownership in Dubai, raising questions about financial transparency.
Police Actions and Legal Proceedings
In a swift response, on April 7, an Assam Police team led by Deputy Commissioner of Police (Crime) Debajit Nath, in coordination with Delhi Police, conducted a search at Pawan Khera's residence in Delhi. However, Khera was not found at the location. DCP Nath emphasized that the police were determined to trace Khera "from wherever he was," indicating the intensity of the investigation.
The legal landscape shifted on April 10 when Justice K Sujana of the Telangana High Court granted Khera transit anticipatory bail for one week. This bail was subject to specific conditions, including a requirement for Khera to approach the Gauhati High Court for appropriate relief. The Assam Police contested the jurisdiction of the Telangana High Court, arguing that since the case was registered in Assam, it fell outside Telangana's territorial purview.
Court's Rationale and Assam's Challenge
Despite jurisdictional objections, the Telangana High Court held that limited transit pre-arrest bail could be granted even for cases registered outside its territorial jurisdiction. The court stated that the contention from the Advocate General of Assam—that Khera could directly approach courts in Assam—could not be a ground to deny limited protection. This decision was particularly justified by the existence of a reasonable apprehension of arrest, as highlighted in the proceedings.
The Assam government's move to the Supreme Court underscores the escalating legal tensions and the state's firm stance on jurisdictional matters in this politically sensitive case.
