Pawan Kheda bail hearing, heated debate between Singhvi and Assam government in Supreme Court, know what happened in the court room

News India Live, Digital Desk: Once again a high-voltage drama was witnessed in the Supreme Court in the matter of cancellation of the bail plea of ​​Congress leader Pawan Khera and the FIRs registered against him. According to Live Hindustan report, during the hearing, there was a heated exchange between senior Congress lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi and the lawyers of the Assam government (represented by Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma). Background of the controversy (Context of the Case) This entire case started with a controversial comment made by Pawan Kheda in the name of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. After this, several cases were registered against him in Assam and Uttar Pradesh. Arrest: He was arrested by Assam Police after deboarding the plane at Delhi airport, after which the Supreme Court granted him interim relief. Main demand: Kheda has demanded that all the FIRs registered in different states should be clubbed together and they should be cancelled. What was the debate in the court room? (The Legal Clash) During the hearing, both sides presented strong arguments: Arguments of Abhishek Manu Singhvi (Pawan Kheda’s lawyer): Freedom of expression: Singhvi argued that filing separate FIRs in multiple states for one statement is abuse of law and oppression. Demand for consolidation: He urged the court to transfer all the cases to one place so that the accused does not have to travel to different states again and again. Nature of the statement: He said that Kheda has already made it clear that it was a case of slip of tongue and he has also expressed regret for it. Stand of Assam government and prosecution: Constitutional dignity: Lawyers for the Assam government argued that such remarks against the Prime Minister are not just a personal insult, but it is an attempt to disturb public peace and hurt the dignity of constitutional posts. Legal process: They argued that Assam The action of the police was completely legal and the investigation is still in the initial stage, hence the FIR should not be cancelled. Chief Minister’s Reference: Representing Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, the lawyers said that it is the responsibility of the police to maintain law and order in the state and such statements can have serious consequences. Supreme Court’s View (Court’s Observation) The Supreme Court has tried to strike a balance in this matter: Interim relief continues: At present, the court has given interim relief to Kheda. The bail has been continued, thereby protecting them from immediate arrest. Consolidation of FIRs: The court had earlier also indicated that the complaints filed in different states could be transferred to a single place (possibly Lucknow or a fixed place) to facilitate the legal process. Next hearing: Considering the seriousness of the case, the court has given time to file a detailed reply and fixed the next date. Political implicationsThis legal battle has now taken the form of a major political controversy. Is. While the Congress is calling it an attempt to ‘suppress the voice of democracy’, the BJP and the Assam government are calling it an ‘insult to the Prime Minister’ and a matter of ‘legal accountability’.