Gauhati HC Rejects Pawan Khera's Anticipatory Bail in Passport Row

The Gauhati High Court, on Friday, April 24, 2026, rejected the anticipatory bail plea filed by prominent Congress leader Pawan Khera. The plea was in connection with a criminal case registered against him by the Crime Branch of Assam Police in Guwahati. The FIR was lodged by Riniki Bhuyan Sharma, the wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. This development marks a significant turn in the ongoing 'passport row' controversy. The case stems from allegations made by Pawan Khera during a press conference on April 4, 2026, where he claimed that Riniki Bhuyan Sharma possessed multiple foreign passports and held undisclosed assets abroad, thereby leveling charges of illegality against her. Following Khera's allegations, Riniki Bhuyan Sharma filed a complaint with the Guwahati Crime Branch Police Station on April 5, leading to the registration of an FIR. The charges invoked against Khera include defamation, forgery of valuable security and public records, cheating, use of forged documents, making false statements in connection with elections, and intentional insult likely to provoke a breach of peace. Both the Chief Minister and his wife have vehemently denied Khera's claims, asserting that the documents cited were fabricated and even suggesting the use of AI-generated and photoshopped images. Khera's legal journey began with Assam Police visiting his Delhi residence on April 7, 2026, though he was not present. They reportedly seized electronic devices during the search. Subsequently, Khera approached the Telangana High Court, which, on April 10, 2026, granted him a week-long transit anticipatory bail. This relief was intended to allow him sufficient time to approach the appropriate jurisdictional court in Assam. However, the Assam government challenged this order before the Supreme Court. On April 15, 2026, the apex court stayed the Telangana High Court's transit anticipatory bail order. Later, on April 17, 2026, the Supreme Court declined Khera's plea to vacate the stay or extend the transit bail period. It instead directed him to approach a competent court in Assam for anticipatory bail, explicitly stating that neither the Telangana High Court's observations nor its own interim order should influence the decision of the jurisdictional court in Assam. Following the Supreme Court's directive, Khera filed an anticipatory bail application before the Gauhati High Court. Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia of the Gauhati High Court reserved the decision on Khera's bail plea on April 21, 2026, after extensive arguments from both sides. During the hearings, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Pawan Khera, argued that the case was politically motivated, alleging a 'political vendetta' orchestrated by the complainant, the Chief Minister's wife, to silence him, especially with elections approaching. He stressed that Khera was not a flight risk and his arrest was unnecessary. Conversely, Assam Advocate General Devajit Lon Saikia, opposing the plea, contended that the case extended beyond mere defamation, involving serious allegations of fabrication of documents and title deeds, with cheating and forgery at the core of the FIR. Adding another layer of complexity, a local court in Guwahati had, on April 19, 2026, rejected Assam Police's request for a non-bailable arrest warrant against Khera, citing a lack of sufficient material to support the request. The Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Kamrup Metro, noted that the grounds were based on presumptions and conjectures. Ultimately, the Gauhati High Court delivered its verdict on April 24, 2026, rejecting Khera's plea for anticipatory bail. The detailed order outlining the court's reasoning is still awaited. This decision means that Khera does not have pre-arrest protection from the Assam Police in this case. This ongoing legal battle has significant political implications, given Khera's position as a prominent Congress leader and the involvement of the Assam Chief Minister's family. The case highlights the tensions between political parties and the legal scrutiny faced by public figures in India. The unfolding events will likely continue to draw considerable media and public attention in India.

Frequently Asked Questions

Read Full Story on Quick Digest