The Supreme Court of India has declined to further extend the interim protection from arrest granted to Congress leader Pawan Khera in connection with an FIR registered in Assam. A Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and K.V. Viswanathan observed that the leader has already enjoyed protection for a significant period and must now approach the regular jurisdictional courts in Assam for his legal remedies.

The case stems from a 2023 incident where Khera was deplaned at the Delhi airport and arrested by the Assam Police for allegedly making "insulting" remarks against the Prime Minister during a press conference. While the Supreme Court had initially granted him transit anticipatory bail and later clubbed the multiple FIRs (registered in Uttar Pradesh and Assam) into a single jurisdiction, the Court has now made it clear that the extraordinary intervention of the apex court cannot continue indefinitely.

The Bench noted that the process of clubbing the FIRs was intended to provide procedural convenience, not to grant a permanent shield against the standard criminal process. "The interim protection was for a limited duration to enable the petitioner to seek regular bail. It cannot be extended further," the Court remarked. The Bench emphasized that the Assam trial court is the appropriate forum to examine the merits of the evidence and the necessity of custody.

Khera’s legal team argued that the FIRs were a result of political vendetta and that the remarks did not constitute a criminal offense under the sections cited (related to promoting enmity and outraging religious feelings). They sought an extension citing the "hostile environment" and the distance involved in traveling to Assam for hearings. However, the Supreme Court maintained that the rule of law requires the accused to submit to the jurisdiction of the court where the trial is set to take place.

This ruling means that Pawan Khera must now file for regular anticipatory bail or regular bail before the concerned court in Assam. If he fails to secure such an order, the Assam Police may technically be at liberty to take him into custody for further investigation. The development is seen as a reminder from the Supreme Court that while it will intervene to prevent "arbitrary arrest" or procedural harassment, it will eventually return high-profile cases to the trial courts for a standard legal conclusion.