None of the arguments presented by Congress leader Pawan Khera’s lawyers were successful in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court refused to extend the transit bail period until Tuesday on the petition of Congress leader Pawan Khera, who is facing an FIR for making allegations against the wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. The Supreme Court directed Pawan Khera to file an anticipatory bail petition in the Guwahati High Court. Pawan Khera had sought the revocation of the Supreme Court’s Wednesday order, which had stayed the anticipatory bail granted by the Telangana High Court. The Supreme Court also reprimanded Pawan Khera during the hearing.
The Supreme Court stated that the Guwahati High Court should not be influenced by the Supreme Court’s observations in the anticipatory bail hearing. The Supreme Court also reprimanded Pawan Khera for submitting incorrect documents (Aadhaar card) to the High Court. Pawan Khera’s lawyer, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, stated that a one-sided order was passed on Wednesday without hearing him. The court then asked Singhvi to review his documents. The Aadhaar card, which provides a different address, misled him. Why did he file the petition in Telangana? Why didn’t he go to Assam?
Reacting to the court’s statement, Singhvi stated that Pawan Khera needs transit bail by Tuesday so he can travel to Assam.
The Telangana petition was filed in haste. This was explained to the court, and a correct document was filed. Pawan Khera’s wife was a former MLA candidate in Telangana. Her affidavit was filed that same day. Singhvi stated that the correct documents were filed when the CBI asked about these documents. These documents were hastily filed in the petition, which is why this happened. I am requesting an extension of transit bail until Tuesday. Singhvi said that his in-laws live in Hyderabad and he visits there regularly.
The Supreme Court asked, “Where did you mention in the transit bail petition filed in the High Court that the wrong address was found on Aadhaar?” Singhvi said, “A correction was made in the High Court. The document was submitted, and the judge recorded it.” The court said, “This cannot happen if you filed forged and fabricated documents. We have also investigated this. We are saying that your conduct is fair. We are saying that it is not.”
Singhvi, representing Pawan Khera, said, “Today is Friday, and we are filing the petition (in Assam) on Monday. Can’t the court grant protection until Tuesday? Is Pawan Khera a major criminal?” If you believe you were misled, I made a small mistake by filing the wrong document. The court asked, “How can you say this is a small mistake?” Singhvi replied, “Because on the same day, in the same hearing, we filed the correct document.”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Assam government, argued that this was a case of lack of jurisdiction and that Kheda’s petition made no mention of why he filed the petition in the Telangana High Court. Mehta stated that the crime occurred in Assam. The FIR was also filed in Assam. This appears to be a case of “choosing a favorable forum” for personal convenience. He requested a stay on the Supreme Court order, saying it was a complete abuse of process. “He (Kheda) did not explain why he was not going to Assam and why he could not go to Assam.” Mehta said the High Court ignored the fact that one of the charges against Kheda carries a sentence of up to 10 years, and that, according to the Aadhaar card address, his wife lives in Delhi.
The controversy began when Congress leader Pawan Kheda made serious allegations against Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma and his wife, Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, for which a case has been filed against Kheda in Assam. Kheda subsequently filed a transit anticipatory bail petition in the Telangana High Court to avoid arrest. The court granted him some relief. However, the Assam government objected to this decision and challenged it in the Supreme Court, following which the Supreme Court stayed the High Court’s decision.