The Telangana High Court on Thursday reserved its order on a transit anticipatory bail plea filed by Congress leader Pawan Khera, triggering a sharp courtroom exchange over allegations of political vendetta, misuse of law, and jurisdiction.
The plea came days after Assam Police registered a case in Guwahati against Khera on charges including forgery and criminal conspiracy, linked to his remarks about Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma’s wife, Riniki Bhuyan Sarma.
Khera had approached the High Court seeking protection from arrest, citing his Hyderabad residence and his wife’s roots in Telangana. He urged the court to grant pre-arrest bail, stating he is a law-abiding citizen with no criminal antecedents and is willing to cooperate with the investigation.
The controversy stems from a press conference on April 5, where Khera alleged that the Chief Minister’s wife held multiple passports and undisclosed foreign assets. The allegations were dismissed by the Sarma family as “false, fabricated and malicious”.
Appearing for Khera, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that the case was politically motivated and the charges were excessive for what he described as a press statement. He told the court that invoking multiple offences over alleged defamatory remarks amounted to harassment.
“Are we living in the wild west where, for a complaint like this, you have to arrest me? In the FIR, every imaginable offence is listed. The allegation is that I held a press conference and I made defamatory statements against you. Just to harass me you have added every offence that can be imagined,” Bar and Bench quoted Singhvi as saying.
Questioning the need for arrest, Singhvi said such actions reflected a “jungle raj” and likened the situation to a “wild west” approach to law enforcement. He also objected to the Assam Police’s move to send a team of 100 officials to Khera’s Delhi residence, calling it disproportionate for a defamation-linked case.
“I am a political opponent. If you start arresting people like this, this becomes nothing but jungle raj,” Singhvi said.
“We are not living in an age of constitutional cowboys. We are not living in an age of malice, whipping out things from the holster and sending 100 people from Assam to Nizamuddin for what the complaint says is a defamation case,” he added.
Furthermore, Singhvi maintained that Khera is neither a flight risk nor a habitual offender, stressing his public profile and willingness to cooperate.
“My wife resides in Hyderabad permanently and I also reside here often. I have submitted proof. I am not a flight risk. I am a prominent political figure. I am not a habitual offender or criminal. Even if you assume all the allegations are true, I am not a flight risk. I am an active politician. I can cooperate. The whole world knows me because I am on television,” he added.
The senior lawyer further criticised the timing of the FIR, registered shortly after midnight on April 7, and claimed the police action was excessive. Singhvi also took exception to remarks allegedly made by the Assam Chief Minister, calling them indicative of malafide intent.
“Look at the language used about me. I will not repeat these words. Malafide political vendetta is writ large. The complainant is virtually defacto the honourable Chief Minister of Assam. I doubt if terrorist plants a bomb, 100 people from Assam will land the next day. I am just showing the context,” he submitted, according to Bar and Bench.
Countering these claims, Assam Advocate General Devajit Saikia rejected the charge of political vendetta and accused Khera of forgery and misleading both the public and the court. He argued that the case extended beyond defamation.
“He has done a lot of forgery and is playing fraud on this court as well. He is trying to mislead this court. He has already done it in public domain to defame the informant who is not even a political person,” Saikia said.
Saikia questioned Khera’s decision to approach the Telangana High Court instead of courts in Assam or Delhi, noting that the plea did not explain why he could not seek anticipatory bail in Assam. He said such extra-territorial relief should be granted only in exceptional circumstances, which, according to him, were absent in this case.
“There is no threat to his life. Assam is not a banana republic,” Saikia told the court, adding that Khera had recently been in Assam and could have moved the appropriate court there.
He also alleged that Khera was a flight risk, claiming he evaded the police when they attempted to reach him.
“There is not a single whisper here about why he cannot come to Assam and file for anticipatory bail. There is no medical reason. He was in Assam on 5th. He was here. He can file anticipatory bail in Assam from any part of the country. The power to grant extra territorial anticipatory bail should be exercised only in exceptional and compelling circumstances. There is nothing mentioned about that in the plea. He could have even moved a court in Delhi since he resides there. Instead, he is in Hyderabad. Although he is saying he is not a flight risk, he is an established flight risk at this stage, when police went to him, he fled,” the AG submitted.
After hearing arguments from both sides for over an hour, Justice K Sujana reserved her order for today.
– Ends
Published By:
Sahil Sinha
Published On:
Apr 10, 2026 09:29 IST
Tune In
