The Supreme Court has allowed Ashish Mishra, accused in the Lakhimpur Kheri violence case, to visit his family every weekend. The court also directed faster trial proceedings and permitted the pruning of unnecessary witnesses.
Ashish Mishra, the main accused in the Lakhimpur Kheri violence case of October 3, 2021, has been allowed by the Supreme Court to visit his home in Lakhimpur Kheri every weekend while he is out on bail.
Mishra, who is the son of former Union Minister Ajay Mishra, had earlier been restricted from entering the district except for attending court trials. The violence happened when farmers were protesting against the three farm laws which were later scrapped by the central government.
Mishra is accused of mowing down four protesting farmers with an SUV.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court modified its earlier bail condition from January 25, 2023, which had barred Mishra from entering Lakhimpur Kheri.
The court was hearing an application filed by Mishra who said he needed to visit his home to spend time with his daughters and his mother who is unwell.
A bench led by Justice Surya Kant and also comprising Justice N Kotiswar Singh accepted Mishra’s request but added some conditions.
The court said this schedule was selected to make sure Mishra is not in Lakhimpur during working court days.
“The order of January 25, 2023, is modified to the extent that the petitioner is permitted to visit Lakhimpur Kheri on every Saturday evening and spent time with family on Saturday evening and throughout the day on Sunday. He will return to Lucknow on Sunday evening.”
However, the bench also placed some limits on his stay.
“Such visit shall be private only to spend time with family members.”
The court made it clear that Mishra should not take part in any “public meeting” or in any “political activity” during his weekend visits.
Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, who appeared for Mishra, requested the court to let him stay the whole weekend with his family, especially to spend more time with his daughters.
But the bench replied humorously,
“Nowadays, even children don’t have time to spend with parents. Don’t disturb the education of your children.”
At the same time, the court was informed that the trial was at a very important stage. Out of a total of 208 listed witnesses, 16 key witnesses had been examined, including 10 who were injured eyewitnesses. Still, many important witnesses are left to be examined.
Senior Additional Advocate General (AAG) of the state, Garima Prashad, informed the bench that following the court’s previous order from March this year, they had reviewed the long list of witnesses to remove unnecessary names.
She said more than 75 eyewitnesses still need to be questioned, along with some public officials and others involved in the investigation.
The bench commented on the need to streamline the witness list.
“We are being very cautious. We do not want the prosecution to blame us later. The eyewitnesses have to be examined and also public servants as they are important. Out of this list, if there are four in a family who are witnesses, one can be examined.”
The court pointed out that it was not in dispute that there was a farmers’ protest going on at the time of the incident.
Hence, some duplication of witnesses could be avoided. But it left the final decision to the public prosecutor.
“The senior AAG points out that the public prosecutor will examine the list of witnesses to find out whether some of the witnesses, if found unnecessary, can be dropped. We leave it to the wisdom of public prosecutor to decide.”
Lawyer Prashant Bhushan, representing the victims, argued that the public prosecutor should identify the important witnesses to make the process faster. Dave objected to this, saying that the victims should not interfere with how the trial is conducted.
But the court did not agree with him and said,
“You cannot expect victims to be silent spectators in a trial. They can certainly point out which are the witnesses to be examined. But you have no role except to cross-examine them.”
During the hearing, the state informed the bench that one victim, who earlier asked for protection, had still not approached the authorities.
Bhushan explained that the victim was afraid, but would now contact the state. In response, Dave claimed that the victim was a Samajwadi Party worker.
The bench refused to get involved in political discussions and said,
“Do not say he belongs to one party, and he belongs to another party. For this reason, we are also not monitoring the trial. Our basic purpose is to expedite the trial.”
The court then scheduled the next hearing for July.
Earlier in March, the Supreme Court had already allowed Mishra to visit his family on April 5 and 6 during the Ram Navami festival.
During that hearing, Dave had requested that his client be permitted to stay in Lakhimpur permanently, arguing that no other accused in the case had such a restriction. He also mentioned Mishra’s good behavior while out on bail.
In the Lakhimpur Kheri incident, eight people lost their lives. Mishra was arrested six days after the violence. The police charge sheet described the attack as pre-planned.
It stated that Mishra arrived in a Mahindra Thar SUV, accompanied by 3–4 other vehicles, at the protest site. Apart from the four farmers, a journalist was also crushed under the vehicles.
This act angered the protesting farmers, and in retaliation, they dragged out three men from the convoy and killed them. A separate FIR was registered in this matter, and the accused farmers in that case are also currently out on bail.
Before approaching the Supreme Court, Mishra’s bail request was rejected by the Allahabad High Court in July 2022.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Lakhimpur Case
