On Tuesday, the Supreme Court directed the Uttar Pradesh government to appoint a new public prosecutor for the Lakhimpur violence trial involving Ashish Mishra, son of former Union minister Ajay Mishra. This decision came after victims expressed concerns that the current prosecutor was neglecting critical eyewitnesses in the case.
A total of eight people were killed in the Lakhimpur Kheri violence. Mishra was arrested within six days of the incident. Infuriated by this act, protesting farmers pulled out three occupants from the car and lynched them. He is currently out on bail on the condition that he cannot stay in Lakhimpur and should not directly or indirectly influence witnesses.
Mishra is accused of mowing down farmers who had gathered to protest against the now-repealed farm laws in 2021 when his father was a central government minister.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant directed the Uttar Pradesh government to replace the incumbent prosecutor with a senior public prosecutor having a “fair experience” of conducting trial within two weeks. The killings were pre-planned as Mishra arrived in a Mahindra Thar SUV along with a convoy of three to four vehicles at the site where the farmers were protesting, according to the police charge sheet.
“There will be gross miscarriage of justice if this presiding officer continues. Even in this case, where a witness produced an illness slip along with a medical certificate, NBW was issued. The court further directed the high court to share the report in a sealed cover pursuant to action taken by the high court chief justice. The court refused to remove the presiding judge as it maintained that it is only monitoring the trial and the high court is best placed to deal with allegations against the judicial officer.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the victims, said that the presiding judge is facing an administrative enquiry initiated by the high court after some “disturbing” things were noted in his court. Bhushan said that the judicial officer in question has invited scrutiny for withdrawing to himself cases under SC/ST and Prevention of Atrocities Act and Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Acts and granting bail and acquitting persons in many cases. The police went to the witness’ house and intimidated the family pursuant to which the witness does not want to appear anymore,” Bhushan said, requesting the presiding officer to be changed. The court directed the application to be forwarded to the Allahabad high court chief justice as it said, “The registry of this court is directed to forward a copy of the application to the chief justice of the Allahabad high court with a request to look into the matter to take appropriate remedial action. The bench said that the judicial officer cannot be faulted for issuing NBW when this court is constantly issuing orders to expedite the trial.
