Supreme Court grants interim relief to Pawan Khera, directs his release on interim bail

A three-bench of the Supreme Court heard an application for urgent reliefs by Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera after being arrested at the Delhi airport by Assam police 

—-

ON Thursday, a three-bench judge of the Supreme Court, headed by the Chief Justice of India Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud and comprising Justices M.R. Shah and P.S. Narasimha, directed the chairperson of the media and television department of the All India Congress Committee, Pawan Khera, to be released on interim bail from the Assam Police's custody on production before the jurisdictional Magistrate at Delhi.

On Thursday morning, Khera was arrested by the Assam police from the Delhi airport over his comment about Prime Minister Narendra Modi during a press conference held on February 17 in Mumbai at which, allegedly, certain objectionable words were directed by him at Modi. Subsequently, three First Information Reports (FIRs) were filed at police stations in Varanasi and Lucknow in Uttar Pradesh, and Dima Hasao in Assam. Consequently, Khera was de-boarded from a flight traveling from Delhi to Raipur by the Assam police.

On an application for urgent interim reliefs, the Supreme Court was moved under Article 32 of the Constitution and the three-bench judge was constituted. The reliefs that were sought in the application included quashing of the complaints, and in the alternative, transfer and clubbing of the FIRs at one jurisdiction, restraint on coercive steps, and the provision of security to Khera and his family.

Senior advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing on behalf of Khera, clarified that he was not pressing the prayer for quashing of FIR at this stage. Khera was advised to pursue steps that are available to him in accordance with the law before the appropriate court.

On the ground that the subject matter of all the FIRs, namely the words used during the press conference, is the same, Dr. Singhvi urged that the FIRs be clubbed under one jurisdiction. According to him, the three different FIRs were filed in different states to cause deliberate harassment to Khera.

Dr. Singhvi stated that since the press conference, Khera has clarified that his use of language was inadvertent, though erroneous. Dr. Singhvi said that Khera would tender an unconditional apology since it was not his intent to be personally offensive by the use of the impugned words. Dr. Singhvi, in his submissions, emphasised that the words, taken at their face value, do not establish the offences punishable under the sections invoked under the FIRs, including Sections 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony), 153B (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration), 295A (deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs), 500 (punishment for defamation), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) and 505(2) (statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes) of the Indian Penal Code.

Dr. Singhvi further noted that as per the charges under the FIRs, the offences are punishable by three and five years of imprisonment. He thereby submitted that no arrest can be made without following the procedure under Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the guidelines laid down by the Supreme in Arnesh Kumar versus State of Bihar & Anr. (2014) and other recent judgments that provide the procedure for arrest where the punishment for the offences charged is less than seven years.

It was Dr. Singhvi's contention that incorrect sections of the IPC were invoked on Khera's exercise of free speech.

Additional Solicitor General of India Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the state of Assam, urged that since Khera has already been arrested at the Delhi airport, he be produced before the court of the competent magistrate for transit bail, where he could seek his remedies.

Bhati produced the video clip where Khera addresses the Prime Minister as "Narendra Gautamdas Modi" while speaking on the allegations of stock manipulation and accounting fraud scheme levelled by American investment research firm Hindenburg Research against multinational conglomerate Adani group during the press conference. Bhati submitted that the words spoken as well as the facial expressions and demeanor of Khera while speaking them were derogatory and calculated. Further, she urged that the words affect public discourse and loyalty, and cause insult and injury to the duly elected Prime Minister of the largest democracy.

On hearing the submissions, the bench noted that it had previously clubbed multiple FIRs in the same jurisdiction in Arnab Ranjan Goswami versus Union of India (2020), and accordingly issued notice  to the states of Assam and Uttar Pradesh for transferring and clubbing all the FIRs which have been registered with respect to the press conference under one jurisdiction. Pending further orders, Khera was directed to be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate in Delhi.

Further, in order to extend protection till Khera applies for regular bail before the jurisdictional court upon the consolidation of the FIRs, the bench directed Khera be released on interim bail by the court of the competent magistrate at Delhi, till the next date of listing.

The order was directed to remain operational till Tuesday, February 28.

Click here to view the Supreme Court's order.