Congress leader Pawan Khera on 3 May hailed the Supreme Court's decision granting him anticipatory bail in connection with an FIR lodged over his alleged remarks against Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. Speaking at the Delhi airport, where Congress workers gathered to welcome him, Khera said the Constitution protects those "fighting against an oppressive government".

What the Supreme Court Ruled

A bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar on 1 May set aside the Gauhati High Court's earlier order that had denied Khera pre-arrest protection. The bench observed that while investigation must proceed with integrity, individual liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be jeopardised lightly.

The top court directed that Khera be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest, subject to reasonable conditions imposed by the investigating officer. He has been asked to cooperate with the investigation, appear before police as and when required, refrain from influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence, and not leave India without prior permission of the competent court.

Khera's Remarks After the Relief

Addressing media at the Delhi airport, Khera said, "The Constitution helps everyone. Whenever someone is in trouble or fighting against an oppressive government, the B.R. Ambedkar's Constitution ensures that they are protected. The relief I received from the Supreme Court is also because of the same Constitution."

The Congress leader's comments drew attention to the broader political context of the case, which his party has characterised as an instance of political targeting through legal mechanisms.

Congress Party's Response

Addressing a press conference, Congress communications in-charge Jairam Ramesh and party MP and senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi — who also served as Khera's counsel — said the apex court's verdict underscores that personal liberty remains paramount and that arrest must not be a routine step but the "last resort", particularly in cases related to alleged defamation.

Singhvi said the ruling reinforces the legal principle that the "triple test" — risk of flight, tampering with evidence, or influencing witnesses — must justify any arrest, failing which custodial action risks becoming a tool for "humiliation, harassment and political point-scoring". He stressed that the Congress was not celebrating the outcome but drawing lessons from it.

Ramesh remarked that the SC relief reaffirmed their faith in the country's judiciary, stating that "the flame of justice is very much alive in our country".

Background of the Case

The FIR against Khera was lodged in Assam over remarks he allegedly made targeting Riniki Bhuyan Sarma. After the Gauhati High Court denied him pre-arrest protection, Khera approached the Supreme Court, which ultimately reversed that decision. The case has drawn wider attention as an example of the intersection between political speech, alleged defamation, and the scope of anticipatory bail under Indian law.

With the Supreme Court's conditions now in place, the investigation is expected to proceed, and Khera's next steps before the competent court will be closely watched by both legal observers and political circles.