“Custodial Interrogation is Necessary”: Gauhati High Court Rejects Pawan Khera’s Anticipatory Bail in Riniki Bhuyan Sarma Case

Key Points

Gauhati High Court on 24 April 2026 rejected Congress leader Pawan Khera’s plea for anticipatory bail in a criminal case linked to his allegations against Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma.

The order was delivered by a single-judge Bench of Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia, three days after the court had reserved its judgment on the matter. The case arises from an FIR filed by Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, following Khera’s claims that she possessed multiple foreign passports and undisclosed overseas assets.

In its ruling, the court emphasised that the case could not be treated as a simple matter of defamation. It observed that there was material suggesting a prima facie offence under Section 339 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which deals with possession of forged documents. It also noted indications of more serious offences, including forgery, cheating and criminal conspiracy.

“Custodial interrogation is necessary in this case to find out who are the associates of Mr. Khera… and from where they had collected those documents,” the court noted as a key factor in its decision.

The court further observed that Khera had not yet substantiated his claims. “He has not yet proved beyond doubt that Smt. Riniki Bhuyan Sarma has passports of three other countries… or that she had opened a company in the United States and invested a huge amount of money,” the order stated.

In a significant observation, the Bench distinguished between political criticism and allegations directed at private individuals. “If Mr. Khera had raised those accusations against the Chief Minister of the State, then the matter would have been political rhetoric. But he has dragged an innocent lady into the controversy,” the court said.

Khera’s legal team, led by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, had argued that the allegations were made in a political context during a press conference and were being “selectively construed” to initiate criminal proceedings. The defence maintained that the matter, at most, amounted to defamation and should be pursued through a private complaint.

They also contended that the FIR was driven by “ulterior motive/political vendetta” and that Khera, as a political spokesperson, was being targeted for statements made in the course of his public duties.

The court rejected this argument, stating, “There are no materials to suggest that the accusations are intended to injure and humiliate the applicant.” It added that the investigation appeared to be aimed at “furthering the ends of justice.”

Opposing the plea, Assam Advocate General Devajit Saikia argued that the case involved serious offences beyond defamation, including cheating and forgery. The State also maintained that the documents relied upon by Khera had been found to be false.

See Also: Election Commission Issues Notice to Congress Spokesperson Pawan Khera After BJP Claims that he has Two Voter Ids

Pawan Khera vs Riniki Bhuyan Sarma

The case has seen multiple legal proceedings over the past weeks. Assam Police had visited Khera’s residence in Delhi on 7 April 2026, after which he approached the Telangana High Court seeking transit anticipatory bail. The Telangana High Court granted him interim protection for one week on 10 April 2026.

However, on 15 April 2026, the Supreme Court stayed the Telangana High Court’s order following an appeal by the Assam government. The apex court declined to extend the interim protection and directed Khera to approach a competent court in Assam. He subsequently filed his anticipatory bail application before the Gauhati High Court.

The allegations against Khera stem from a press conference held on 5 April 2026, where he claimed that Riniki Bhuyan Sarma held multiple passports, including from the UAE, Egypt, and Antigua and Barbuda, and had undisclosed assets abroad. He also referred to documents that allegedly indicated foreign properties and a company in the United States.

Following these claims, Riniki Bhuyan Sarma filed a complaint stating that the allegations were false and that the documents cited were forged. An FIR was registered by the Guwahati Crime Branch under multiple sections, including those related to forgery, cheating, defamation, criminal conspiracy and making false statements in connection with an election.

Separately, sources in the Ministry of External Affairs indicated that the passport documents cited by Khera were found to be fraudulent and that Riniki Bhuyan Sarma does not hold citizenship of any other country.

After the High Court’s decision, the Congress indicated that it would challenge the order in the Supreme Court. Party leader Jairam Ramesh said the party stood “solidly in solidarity” with Khera and expressed confidence that “justice will prevail over the politics of threat, intimidation, and harassment.”

The case now moves into its next phase, with the investigation continuing and a potential appeal before the Supreme Court expected in the coming days.

[DS]

Suggested Reading: