E-Paper
Supreme Court stays interim protection from arrest for Congress’s Pawan Khera
On April 9, a single judge bench of the Telangana high court granted Congress leader Pawan Khera one-week interim relief
The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the interim protection from arrest to Congress leader Pawan Khera in connection with a first information report (FIR) filed in Assam over allegations that chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma’s wife, Riniki Bhuyan Sharma, held foreign passports.
A bench of justices J K Maheshwari and AS Chandurkar stayed the April 9 order of a single judge bench of the Telangana high court, granting Khera one-week interim relief. The high court said the order should not be considered as a hindrance to Khera moving the appropriate court in Assam for anticipatory bail.
The Supreme Court issued a notice to Khera on the Assam Police’s petition challenging the high court order. “Operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed. In case the petitioner applies for anticipatory bail before a court having jurisdiction in Assam, while deciding such application, an order passed by this court will not have any impact,” the Supreme Court said.
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Assam Police, argued that Khera approached the high court based on “forged” documents. He said the alleged offence, the press conference, where Khera made the allegations, took place in Assam. He added that the case was registered in Assam, and yet Khera chose to move the Telangana high court for anticipatory bail.
Mehta said Khera had not shown any reason why he could not seek relief from the courts in Assam. “It is a complete abuse of process. He [Khera] has actually attempted forum shopping or forum choosing.”
Mehta said Khera justified having moved the Telangana high court, saying that his wife stayed in Hyderabad and that he visited and stayed in the city often. He added that Khera’s Aadhaar card bore his residential address in New Delhi.
Mehta said the claim that his wife resided in Hyderabad did not automatically mean that the Telangana high court had the jurisdiction to preside over the case. “Mere renting or owning a property somewhere cannot confer territorial jurisdiction [upon the courts there],” Mehta said.
The Supreme Court noted that Khera sought regular bail before the Telangana high court even as the case was filed in Guwahati. It observed that the material on record, including the address details of Khera’s wife, “did not prima facie support the invocation of jurisdiction in Telangana.”
The court noted that Khera had sought an extension of the interim protection granted by another three weeks before issuing notices and staying the high court order.
Khera, represented by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, maintained that the case amounted, at best, to defamation and did not warrant arrest. He accused Sarma of a political vendetta.
The Assam Police said the allegations against Khera involved forgery and fabrication of documents and opposed any pre-arrest protection.
