The Supreme Court has lodged FIRs against Pawan Khera in Lucknow and has granted him protection from arrest until April 10.

Khera had approached the court on February 23 after being detained by Assam police at the Delhi airport following the filing of a FIR against him at the state’s Haflong police station.

The Supreme Court on Monday ordered that all criminal cases against Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera for his comments against Prime Minister Narendra Modi be consolidated at the Hazratganj police station in Lucknow, and that he be granted bail in all cases until April 10, after which he can apply to the Uttar Pradesh High Court.

Khera had approached the court on February 23 after being detained by Assam police at the Delhi airport following the filing of a FIR (first information report) against him at the state’s Haflong police station.

The court granted interim bail and requested responses from the governments of Assam and Uttar Pradesh, where three FIRs were filed against Khare in connection with the same incident.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud noted that the first FIR was lodged in Hazratganj on February 20, and another in Varanasi on the same day against Khare. The Assam FIR, on the other hand, was filed two days later.
“We order and direct that the FIRs registered at PS Cantt, Varanasi, and PS Haflong be transferred to PS Hazratganj,” the bench, which also included justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala, said.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who represented the two state governments, insisted that the case be heard in Assam because the arrest occurred there.
When the case was heard, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi was not present to represent Khera.
Advocate Abhishek Jebraj, who represented Khera, requested that the case be heard on Monday.
“We want the cases transferred to Delhi for a fair trial,” he said. The complaints in the three FIRs were filed by members of the two states’ ruling political parties.”
“We will not transfer to Delhi,” the court clarified, but agreed to extend the protection from arrest granted on February 23 and extended on two subsequent occasions until April 10.
“The interim order of this court (extended by orders of February 27 and March 3) shall stand extended for a period of until April 10,” the bench said. The petitioner will be free to seek regular bail from the jurisdictional court (Hazratganj).”
Mehta informed the court that the interim protection was granted in exchange for Khera’s lawyer’s unconditional apology.
However, Khera’s response justified his remark, and his apology was never recorded.
“It was a very dirty statement that was not in good taste to make. However, we want to find out what prompted him to make such a statement. Petitioner has never apologized or shown remorse. His counsel offered the apology.”
He went on to say that the Congress party’s official Twitter handles are still sharing Khera’s comments.
“It is not a simple statement; it is a calculated attack on the family” (of Prime Minister). It is unfortunate that a person who is not involved in public life is being vilified in this manner. This should not happen, and the petitioner must keep it under control,” Mehta added.
“We always go by the apology tendered by the counsel,” the bench stated. We have relied on Singhvi’s statement that he apologizes to the petitioner. If anything changes, we will cancel our order.”
Jebraj assured the court that the petitioner would follow through on his apology.
In deciding the case, the court stated, “The petitioner has reiterated that he stands by the unconditional apology tendered by his counsel, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi.”
Earlier, the state governments of Assam and UP in their responses had claimed that the use of words and demeanor of the petitioner at the press conference made it apparent that the offences were “intentionally planned and perpetrated”.
The state governments opposed the clubbing of FIRs, calling the petition filed by Khera an attempt to “leapfrogging” the routine normal procedure available under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) for seeking quashing of criminal cases. They said, “The submission made before this court tendering an apology clearly appears to be a tactical submission to get a preventive order without any genuine remorse or repentance.”
The Assam government also claimed that the FIR registered at Haflong police station includes within its scope the offence of criminal conspiracy under Section 120B of the Indian penal code (IPC), which needs to be independently investigated because it is not included in the other two FIRs registered in Uttar Pradesh.
The state accused the petitioner of “mischievously” uttering irresponsible sentences that had lowered the level of discourse.
During the first hearing, Singhvi apologized and told the court that he did not agree with the spokesperson’s words.
The Assam FIR related to promoting enmity and making imputations prejudicial to national integration, among other offenses punishable under Sections 153A, 153B, 500, 504, 505(1)(b), 505(2), and 120B of the IPC.
Khera referred to PM Modi as ‘Narendra Gautamdas Modi’ during a press conference on the Adani issue on February 17. Later, he appeared to have immediately corrected himself.
The press conference was held to highlight the Congress’ demand for a JPC investigation into allegations made against the Adani Group in a report by the US-based short-seller Hindenburg Research.