The Gauhati High Court on Friday rejected the anticipatory bail plea of Congress leader Pawan Khera in connection with a forgery and criminal case lodged against him by Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma's wife, Riniki Bhuyan Sharma.
A single-judge bench of Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia observed that the case could not be termed as defamation simpliciter and that there are materials for a prima facie case under forgery.
The case was registered at the crime branch of the Guwahati Police Commissionerate based on a complaint filed by Riniki on April 6 night, hours after Khera held two back-to-back press conferences in Delhi and Guwahati accusing her of holding passports of the UAE, Egypt, and Antigua and Barbuda, besides owning assets in foreign nations.
In his order, Justice Saikia stated, “Khera had claimed that the accusations he had brought are based on certain documents, which he has in his possession. On the other hand, police claimed that those documents were already detected to be false documents. After filing of the case by the informant (Riniki), the petitioner (Khera) has not made any claims that the police had fabricated claims that his documents are false.”
The judge added that the submission of advocate general D Saikia — that Khera's case falls under Section 339 (Possession of a forged document with intent to use it as genuine) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — seems to have force in it.
Court's Observations on Political Motive
Justice Saikia observed that while Riniki's husband is a politician and the Chief Minister of Assam, Riniki herself is not involved in politics. If Khera had raised those accusations against the Chief Minister, the matter would have been political rhetoric. However, in order to gain political mileage, Khera has dragged an innocent lady into the controversy.
The judge noted that Khera has not yet proved beyond doubt that Riniki holds passports of three other countries or that she opened a company in the United States of America and invested a huge amount of money.
The court stated, “This court is of the opinion that under the given circumstances, this case cannot be termed as a case of defamation simpliciter. There are materials for a prima facie case under Section 339 of the BNS, 2023 and the petitioner has been avoiding police investigation.”
Need for Custodial Interrogation
Justice Saikia stated that custodial interrogation is necessary to find out who Khera's associates are, who collected those documents for him, and how and from where they obtained them.
Rejecting the pre-arrest bail plea, the judge said, “This court holds that the petitioner Pawan Khera does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, his prayer for pre-arrest bail is rejected.”
The court heard the anticipatory bail plea on April 21 and reserved its order until Friday.
Background of the Case
Khera was granted transit anticipatory bail by the Telangana High Court on April 10, with conditions including cooperation with the investigation, restriction on foreign travel without permission, and restraint from making statements that could prejudice the probe.
The Assam government subsequently approached the Supreme Court against the relief granted by the Telangana High Court. The apex court denied any relief to Khera and advised him to move his bail petition before the Gauhati High Court.
