Khera bail rejection sparks row: Lawyers seek recall of HC order over ‘conflict of interest’

Within hours of the Gauhati High Court rejecting Congress leader Pawan Khera’s anticipatory bail plea, a fresh controversy erupted as senior advocates (counsels of Khera) moved the Chief Justice seeking recall of the order, alleging suppression of material facts and conflict of interest involving the state’s top law officer.

In a formal complaint addressed to Chief Justice Ashutosh Kumar, the advocates led by Reetam Singh raised serious objections to the role of Advocate General Devajit Lon Saikia, who represented the state during the hearing.

“We have pointed out that the Advocate General appeared in a dual capacity and relied on documents which, in fact, disclosed his own financial relationship with the parties involved. This was never brought transparently before the court,” the complainant's advocate stated.

Plea seeks fresh hearing

The plea seeks recall of the April 24 order and a fresh hearing before an independent bench, arguing that non-disclosure of such facts undermines the fairness of the proceedings.

Also Read: Gauhati HC denies anticipatory bail to Pawan Khera in Assam CM’s wife case

The High Court had earlier in the day rejected Khera’s anticipatory bail plea in a case linked to allegations he made against Riniki Bhuyan Sharma, wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. The case is being investigated by the Guwahati Crime Branch. A single bench of Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia delivered the order after reserving judgment on April 21.

The complaint

According to the complaint, the Advocate General cited the Chief Minister’s election affidavit dated March 20, 2026, filed for the Jalukbari constituency, during arguments.

“I relied on the affidavit in court, but at the same time, I did not disclose that the same document records an ongoing financial relationship between the individuals concerned and me,” the complaint alleged, pointing to outstanding loans mentioned in the affidavit.

The advocates argued that this omission amounts to “grave suppression of material facts”.

“I believe this creates a reasonable apprehension of bias and strikes at the root of natural justice and the right to a fair trial under Article 21,” they stated.

Also Read: SC refuses relief to Pawan Khera in case over remarks against Assam CM’s wife

They further urged the Chief Justice to take suo motu cognisance or treat the representation as a petition under constitutional provisions.

“We believe the order must be recalled in the interest of justice and judicial propriety, and the anticipatory bail plea should be reheard by an independent bench with conflict-free representation for the state. Given the circumstances, we urge you to take suo motu cognisance or treat this as a petition under Articles 226/227 read with Section 482 BNSS, recall the April 24 order in AB/804/2026, and ensure a fresh hearing to safeguard a fair trial and prevent any miscarriage of justice,” they said.

‘Arrest unwarranted’

The development comes against the backdrop of intense legal arguments earlier in the day when Khera’s plea was heard. Appearing for Khera, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that the case was politically driven.

“I am facing a situation where the Chief Minister himself is targeting me. How can I expect fair treatment when the entire machinery appears to be against me?” he submitted.

He also maintained that the arrest was unwarranted.

“I am not a flight risk. There is no reason to take me into custody when I have cooperated throughout,” he argued.

Also Read: Telangana HC grants anticipatory bail to Pawan Khera over FIR by Assam CM’s wife

Senior counsel KN Choudhury supported this line of argument.

“The allegations against me are scandalous and clearly crafted with malice. The manner and tone show deliberate targeting,” he said, questioning the basis of the case.

The defence maintained that the issue, at best, fell within the scope of criminal defamation and should be pursued through a private complaint.

Fabrication of docs, cheating, forgery: Prosecution

Opposing the plea, Advocate General Devajit Lon Saikia argued that the charges were far more serious.

“This is not just defamation. I am dealing with allegations involving the fabrication of documents, cheating, and forgery. A thorough investigation is necessary,” he told the court.

HC’s order

In its order, the High Court made strong observations on the nature of the allegations.

“If I had made accusations against the Chief Minister, it might have been political rhetoric. But I dragged an innocent lady into the controversy, which reflects a different intent,” the court observed.

The bench also ruled out treating the case as a simple defamation matter and underlined the need for custodial interrogation.

“I need to identify those who collected and supplied the documents. Without custodial interrogation, this cannot be effectively examined,” the order stated.

Also Read: Congress accuses Assam CM's wife of holding multiple foreign passports: What rules say

The court further noted that Khera had failed to substantiate his claims. “I have not been able to establish beyond doubt that Riniki Bhuyan Sharma holds passports of three other countries or that she set up a company in the United States with substantial investments,” the bench added.

The court clarified that if Khera approaches a competent court in Assam for relief, the interim orders of the Supreme Court would not prejudice the consideration of his application.