New Delhi, April 25: The Indian National Congress announced on Saturday, April 25, that it will escalate its legal fight to the Supreme Court of India after the Gauhati High Court denied anticipatory bail to senior party leader and Media and Publicity Department Chairman Pawan Khera. The case stems from an FIR filed in Assam over Khera's alleged remarks targeting Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma's wife, Riniki Bhuyan Sharma. The Congress has framed the legal proceedings as politically motivated intimidation against its spokesperson.

Congress Stands Firm Behind Pawan Khera

Congress General Secretary (Communications) Jairam Ramesh took to social media platform X to declare the party's unwavering support for Khera. He described the INC as standing solidly in solidarity with the accused leader and expressed full confidence that the Supreme Court would deliver justice.

The entire Indian National Congress stands solidly in solidarity with Pawan Khera, the Chairman of its Media and Publicity Department. The verdict of the Guwahati High Court is in the process of being challenged in the Supreme Court. We are confident that justice will prevail over the politics of threat, intimidation, and harassment, Ramesh stated.

What the Gauhati High Court Ruled

A single-judge bench of Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia of the Gauhati High Court rejected Khera's anticipatory bail plea on Friday, April 24, holding that he does not deserve to be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. The court further ruled that the case could not be treated as one of simple defamation.

Justice Saikia found prima facie grounds under Section 339 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, noting that the allegations involved documents later found to be false, thereby attracting serious criminal offences beyond simple defamation.

Crucially, the court emphasized the necessity of custodial interrogation to trace the origin of the documents Khera relied upon. The court stated that custodial interrogation is necessary to find out who are the associates of Mr. Khera, who had collected those documents for him and how and from where they had collected those documents.

Background: The Allegations That Triggered the FIR

The controversy erupted during a press conference held by Khera in Guwahati earlier this month, where he alleged that Riniki Bhuyan Sharma held multiple foreign passports and had undisclosed financial dealings abroad. The allegations were made in the context of what Khera's legal team described as electoral political discourse.

Riniki Bhuyan Sharma swiftly filed an FIR denying the claims, asserting that she is solely an Indian citizen and that the documents cited were fabricated or falsified.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Khera, argued the remarks constituted political rhetoric within the bounds of electoral speech and, at most, could attract defamation charges. He also raised concerns of political vendetta and potential harassment upon arrest.

State's Counter-Arguments and Court's Rejection of Political Motive

Assam Advocate General Devajit Lon Saikia argued on behalf of the state that the documents cited by Khera were subsequently proven to be false, escalating the matter beyond defamation into more serious criminal territory under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

The Gauhati High Court rejected the political vendetta argument, holding that the prosecution appeared motivated by furthering the ends of justice rather than any intent to injure and humiliate the petitioner. This finding significantly weakens the Congress narrative of targeted political persecution at the High Court level.

Supreme Court's Earlier Refusal and What Comes Next

This is not the first time the Supreme Court has been drawn into this matter. The apex court had previously refused to grant Khera protection from arrest and declined to extend his transit anticipatory bail, directing him to approach the competent court in Assam, a direction that led to the now-rejected High Court plea.

With the Gauhati High Court firmly ruling against Khera and the Supreme Court having already declined transit protection once, the Congress faces a steeper legal climb. The party's decision to return to the Supreme Court signals that it views this case not merely as a legal dispute but as a high-stakes political battle ahead of upcoming electoral cycles. Legal observers will be watching closely to see whether the apex court agrees to hear the challenge and whether it imposes any interim protection against arrest for Khera pending the final hearing.