Court weighs need for custodial interrogation as both sides present sharply opposing arguments
Guwahati: The Supreme Court on April 30 reserved its judgment on Congress leader Pawan Khera’s plea for anticipatory bail in a case filed by Assam Police. The complaint, lodged by Riniki Bhuyan Sharma, wife of Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, relates to allegations made by Khera regarding foreign passports and overseas financial interests.
A bench of Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Atul Chandurkar heard arguments from both sides after the Gauhati High Court denied him relief. Appearing for Khera, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi questioned the need for arrest, stating, “Why is it necessary to humiliate with a custodial interrogation?” He argued that the case primarily involved defamation and emphasised that Khera is willing to cooperate and is not a flight risk.
Singhvi also raised concerns about public remarks allegedly made in the matter, suggesting they intensified apprehension of arrest. He further pointed out that most charges invoked are bailable and criticised the police presence at Khera’s Delhi residence as excessive.
Opposing the plea, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the State of Assam, argued that the documents cited by Khera were “fake and forged.” He maintained that custodial interrogation is necessary to identify those involved in preparing the documents and to examine any wider links.
The FIR includes charges related to forgery, cheating, and intentional insult under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Earlier, Khera had received interim protection from the Telangana High Court before being directed to seek relief in Assam.
Also Read: Nagaland’s Kekhriesilie Rio Clinches Grand Prix Title in France
