3 min readHyderabadApr 10, 2026 02:09 AM IST
First published on: Apr 9, 2026 at 05:58 PM IST
The Telangana High Court Thursday reserved its orders in the anticipatory bail plea filed by Congress leader Pawan Khera in connection with an FIR filed by Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma’s wife Riniki Bhuyan Sharma.
Appearing for Khera, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi submitted that a number of charges have been registered against Khera but the case at best could be one of alleged defamation and nothing else. He argued that the First Information Report (FIR) was a clever way to silence, harass, and intimidate political opposition and does not warrant an arrest. Singhvi clarified that Khera filed the petition before the Telangana HC since he was visiting his wife in Hyderabad when informed of the FIR against him.
Stating that Khera was a political opponent and raised an allegation at a press conference, Singhvi said, “If you start arresting people for this, it would become a jungle raj.”
“We are not living in an age of constitutional cowboys, whipping out things from the holster and sending 100 people (policemen) from Assam for what the complaint says is defamation,” Singhvi further said, before asking, “What will the police do when the constitutional cowboy heads the police, the state and the bureaucracy?”
Khera, 58, is facing charges of forgery, cheating, criminal intimidation and conspiracy. The Congress leader approached the Telangana High Court on Tuesday (April 7), apprehending an arrest by the Guwahati police Crime Branch in connection with the case.
‘Political vendetta’
In his petition, Khera submitted that the complaint is lodged with “ulterior motives”, a result of “political vendetta”, and an abuse of law intended to harass and intimidate him for performing his duties as a political spokesperson. He added that the FIR does not disclose any actual offence and lacks credible material linking him to the alleged crimes. Khera claimed the allegations concern public statements made during a press conference, so custodial interrogation is unnecessary as no “recovery or discovery” is required from him.
Assam Advocate General Devajit Saikia appeared for the Guwahati police Crime Branch and claimed that the Aadhaar card copy of the petitioner attached in the petition had different Aadhaar numbers on either side.
Without touching on the merits of the case, he submitted his objections on the ground of maintainability of the bail petition since the petitioner was a permanent resident of Delhi and not Hyderabad. Citing the Supreme Court judgment in ‘Priya Indoria vs. State of Karnataka’ (2023) that clarified the law on transit anticipatory bail, Saikia argued that there was no indication in the petition as to why Khera could not come to Assam and file for an anticipatory bail.
He further argued that the petitioner has not cited any exceptional or compelling circumstances for approaching the Telangana High Court and could have approached the Delhi High Court since he was a permanent resident of Delhi. He also said that Khera fled from Delhi before the police reached his Nizamuddin residence and hence was an established flight-risk. Calling Khera an “international Khiladi”, he also said that the petitioner has 19 cases registered against him across the country.
After hearing the arguments of both sides, the court reserved its order for Friday.
Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera. (File Photo) 
Share
