3 min readNew DelhiMay 1, 2026 02:49 AM IST
First published on: Apr 30, 2026 at 09:02 PM IST
The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its order on Congress leader Pawan Khera’s plea for anticipatory bail in the case in which he had accused Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma’s wife’s Riniki Bhuyan Sharma of holding multiple passports.
A bench of Justices J K Maheshwari and Atul Chandurkar reserved its decision on Khera’s appeal challenging the April 24 order of the Gauhati High Court denying the Congress leader anticipatory bail in the case.
Appearing for Khera, Senior Advocate A M Singhvi said, “This is an unprecedented case where my apprehension is made fully credible by the prosecutor himself in an unprecedented manner.”
Referring to statements against Khera by the CM, Singhvi said, “These are statements by the boss of the boss of the boss of the boss of the prosecutor. There is no question of (my) apprehension of arrest being in doubt.”
In an apparent reference to CM Sarma, the senior counsel said, “Dr (B R) Ambedkar would turn in his grave if he had imagined a Constitutional holder of office to speak like a Constitutional cowboy or a Constitutional Rambo.”
Singhvi said that “the heart of the allegation is reputational damage, at a press conference, in public domain with public documents” and wondered what was the need for arrest in such a case.
“The question is need and necessity to arrest…Let me assume I will be convicted ultimately. Why is it (arrest) necessary? The necessity is only arising from the angst reflected in the constitutional cowboy’s various statements,” Singhvi added.
The senior counsel said, “If I cannot seek anticipatory bail with this situation, the very purpose of anticipatory bail is gone.”
He said that about 50 to 70 policemen had landed up at Delhi’s Nizamuddin to arrest Khera “as if hunting for a terrorist”.
Referring to a media interview by Sarma on April 18, Singhvi said the Assam CM had spewed “venom and malice”, adding, “This is beyond a person who holds a constitutional office.”
The senior counsel also questioned the High Court terming Bhuyan an “innocent lady”, stating that it is a matter to be determined in trial.
Appearing for the state government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and said Khera had shown certain fake documents at the presser. Justifying the need for custodial interrogation, he said it was necessary to find out whether he had any accomplice and to know if any foreign elements were involved.
“As an investigating agency, I would like to know how you forged the documents? What was your intent? If you did not forge, who gave it to you? Who were the foreign elements who were interested in interfering with our elections? Custodial interrogation is qualitatively different from other forms of interrogation,” Mehta submitted.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and said Pawan Khera (in photo) had shown certain fake documents at the presser. (File photo) 
Share
