The Lakhimpur Kheri trial judge replaced, and a new Special Public Prosecutor in charge: that is where the 2021 violence trial stands after the Supreme Court asked the Allahabad High Court to act on the victims’ concerns.
New Delhi: The presiding officer of the October 2021 violence trial has been changed, and a new Special Public Prosecutor appointed, a few weeks after the Supreme Court passed the victims’ concerns about the trial judge on to the Allahabad High Court for remedial action. The allegations the victims made against the earlier judge remain untested [Ashish Mishra alias Monu v. State of U.P.].
Hearings took place on September 22 and October 5, 2026 before a Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana, on the special leave petition of Ashish Mishra, son of former Union Minister Ajay Mishra and the accused in the case. He is presumed innocent, the allegations are untested, and the Court has expressed no view on the merits of the trial.
Referred to the High Court, not decided
The Supreme Court itself gave no directions against the trial judge. On September 22 it asked the Registry to send the complainant’s application to the Allahabad High Court, asking the High Court to look into the matter, take remedial action and report in a sealed cover. The bench also asked the State of Uttar Pradesh, orally, to make sure a senior Public Prosecutor was given the case.
By October 5, Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the Allahabad High Court, told the bench that the report of the High Court’s Vigilance Officer on the trial judge had been sent directly to the Supreme Court. The Court ordered that it go before the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court “for an appropriate decision”. The CJI added that the vigilance inquiry is an exercise under the applicable rules, and that the competent judicial authority will decide.
The new faces at Lakhimpur Kheri
Following his appointment on October 14, 2026, Judicial Officer Lokesh Rai has taken over as District and Sessions Judge of Lakhimpur Kheri. Advocate Kapil Katiyar is the Special Public Prosecutor now, replacing the Additional District Government Counsel who had been holding charge of the prosecution.
Both are administrative steps. Neither is a finding on any allegation made against the earlier presiding officer.
What the victims told the Court
On September 22, Advocate Prashant Bhushan, for the victims, called the trial judge’s conduct shocking and asked for the judge to be replaced. He alleged that a non-bailable warrant had been issued against an ill eyewitness, that NDPS and SC/ST Act cases had been withdrawn to the judge’s own file, that accused persons had been acquitted in cases near the end of trial, and that a site plan had gone missing from the court record.
The change of Public Prosecutor drew his objection too, on the argument that the new prosecutor lacked experience and that crucial witnesses had been given up. These are the victims’ allegations, and none has been tested.
The CJI observed that the trial judge may have been under pressure to expedite the trial, and that the prosecution had to explain a witness’s absence. Justice Bagchi asked the prosecutor about giving up crucial witnesses, saying that would not amount to a fair prosecution.
Mishra’s side, and the State’s
Appearing for Ashish Mishra, Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave opposed changing the Public Prosecutor midway through the trial. He submitted that repeated allegations had been made against the presiding officer and the prosecutor, that a change could amount to indirect pressure on the presiding officer, that 86 witnesses, many of them eyewitnesses, had already been examined, and that the existing prosecutor had done well.
For the State, Advocate Ruchira Goel told the Court that a new Special Public Prosecutor with 16 years of experience, including as a District Government Counsel, had been recommended after consulting the District Magistrate of Lakhimpur Kheri.
Tikunia, October 2021
The trial stems from the violence of October 2021 in Tikunia, Lakhimpur Kheri, during the farm-law agitation, in which eight people died, among them four protesting farmers and a journalist. The prosecution’s case is that vehicles linked to Ashish Mishra’s convoy ran over protesting farmers.
Mishra has been on bail since January 2023, when the Supreme Court granted interim bail that was later made absolute with conditions. Since then the Court has dealt with witness-intimidation allegations and, in May 2026, expressed dissatisfaction over the slow pace of the trial and the delay in securing witnesses.
What the sequence shows
The Supreme Court took a supervisory route. Rather than pass directions against a trial judge itself, it referred the complaint to the High Court, which has administrative control over the district judiciary, and asked for remedial action. The new judge and new Special Public Prosecutor in a trial the Court has repeatedly asked to be expedited came after that referral. Whether the change affects the pace of the trial remains to be seen, and the trial itself is pending, with the accused presumed innocent.
Case Title: Ashish Mishra alias Monu v. State of U.P. [SLP (Crl) No. 7857/2022]
Bench: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana, Supreme Court of India
Dates of Orders: September 22, 2026 and October 5, 2026
Appearances: Advocate Prashant Bhushan for the victims; Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave for Ashish Mishra; Advocate Ruchira Goel for the State of Uttar Pradesh; Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi for the Allahabad High Court