On Thursday, April 30, the Supreme Court reserved its verdict on the anticipatory bail plea by Congress leader Pawan Khera who faces a case filed by Guwahati Police over allegedly defamatory remarks against Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma’s wife, Riniki Bhuyan Sarma.
Notably, Khera, during a press interaction in Guwahati, alleged that Riniki Bhuyan Sarma possessed multiple passports from different countries and had undisclosed international assets. Following these claims, a defamation complaint was lodged against Pawan Khera in Assam.
Appearing for Khera in Supreme Court, Abhishek Manu Singhvi said that his client is “not a hardened criminal,” but a political spokesperson engaged in the rough-and-tumble of democratic debate. The defense argued that statements made by Khera, which triggered the defamation proceedings, were part of a broader political critique and should not be interpreted as malicious or deliberately defamatory.
Singhvi also said that most of the charges against his client were defamation and reputational damage, and neither called for arrest or custodial interrogation, as had been sought. “Let me assume I am convicted ultimately, but where is the necessity of arrest? What is there in the case which cannot be done without an arrest?”, he said.
Singhvi talked about Khera’s long-standing public life, asserting that he has no history of criminal behavior that would justify labeling him as a repeat offender. “This is not a case involving a pattern of criminality,” the lawyer argued, adding that the court must distinguish between genuine criminal acts and politically charged speech that may be controversial but falls within democratic rights.
