'Politically motivated': SC grants relief to Congress leader Pawan Khera

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the anticipatory bail plea of Congress leader Pawan Khera in connection with an FIR lodged by the Assam Police over his alleged remarks against Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma.

A Bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar set aside the Gauhati High Court's decision that had denied him pre-arrest protection, observing that while investigation must proceed with integrity, individual liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be jeopardised lightly.

“While adjudicating an application for anticipatory bail, a careful balance must be struck between the State’s interest in ensuring a fair investigation and the individual’s fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21,” the Justice Maheshwari-led Bench said.

The apex court said that the criminal process must be applied with “objectivity and circumspection” to ensure that liberty is not imperilled by proceedings that may be coloured by political rivalry. “We are of the opinion that the allegations and counter-allegations, as apparent in the present case, prima facie, appear to be politically motivated and seemingly influenced by such rivalry, rather than disclosing a situation warranting custodial interrogation,” the Supreme Court held.

Allowing the appeal, the top court directed that Khera be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest, subject to reasonable conditions imposed by the investigating officer.

It further directed Khera to cooperate with the investigation, appear before the police as and when required, refrain from influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence, and not leave India without prior permission of the competent court.

The Justice Maheshwari-led Bench found that the Gauhati High Court had erred in shifting the burden on the accused and had incorrectly relied on Section 339 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), despite the provision not being invoked in the FIR.

“In our view, the observations made by the High Court in the order impugned are not based on a correct appreciation of all the material placed on record and appear to be erroneous,” the apex court said.

During the hearing, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Khera, argued that the case essentially pertained to reputational harm and defamation, which did not justify custodial arrest.