In a serious blow to the Congress ecosystem, the Gauhati High Court refused anticipatory bail to party leader Pawan Khera in the FIR linked to his allegations against Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. The order does more than deny Khera protection from arrest. It also punches holes in the political vendetta narrative the Congress has tried to build.
Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia made it clear that the matter could not be reduced to routine political rhetoric or simple defamation. Instead, the Court held that custodial interrogation was necessary to trace the source of documents and claims circulated against the Assam Chief Minister’s wife.
More importantly, the Court observed that Khera had dragged an “innocent lady” into controversy for political mileage. That remark cuts to the heart of the dispute and raises uncomfortable questions for a party that often claims victimhood when challenged over its conduct.
Court Refuses to Buy Congress’s Argument
Khera’s defence argued the FIR stemmed from a political vendetta. Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi insisted there was no need for arrest and maintained the case amounted, at most, to criminal defamation.
However, the Court did not accept that argument.
Assam Advocate General Devajit Lon Saikia argued the dominant offences involved cheating and forgery, not mere political speech. The bench appeared to agree. Consequently, the Court rejected attempts to cloak serious allegations under the cover of political expression.
For weeks, Congress projected the case as harassment. Yet today’s order disrupted that narrative. The Court effectively drew a line between legitimate political attack and allegations made without established proof.
From Transit Bail to Complete Setback
The ruling follows a string of failed legal attempts by Khera.
The Telangana High Court had briefly granted transit anticipatory bail. However, Assam challenged that order in the Supreme Court, which stayed the relief. Khera then failed to persuade the top court to vacate that stay and therefore moved the Gauhati High Court.
Now even that door has shut.
The FIR invokes multiple Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita provisions, including cheating, forgery, use of forged documents, false election-linked statements and defamation.
The controversy erupted after Khera alleged Riniki Bhuyan Sarma held three passports and overseas assets, including links to foreign entities. Both she and the Assam Chief Minister rejected those claims outright. Meanwhile, Assam Police searched Khera’s Delhi residence and intensified the probe.
Congress’s Politics of Allegation Faces a Test
The order carries implications far beyond one bail plea.
It strikes at a familiar opposition template: make sensational allegations, weaponise them politically, and later retreat behind the shield of free speech when challenged.
Moreover, the Gauhati High Court has signalled that such politics may not survive judicial scrutiny.
For Congress, this is not merely a courtroom defeat. It is a credibility hit.
And for Pawan Khera, the narrative has shifted from persecution claims to questions over accountability.