E-Paper
Ashish Mishra not a flight risk, witnesses safe: UP to Supreme Court
Lakhimpur Kheri case: Lending tacit support to the February 10 order of the Allahabad HC granting bail to Ashish Mishra, the government added that it did not accept the recommendation of the top court-mandated SIT seeking cancellation of Mishra’s bail since the team’s apprehensions regarding threats to witnesses were not substantiated.
The Supreme Court on Monday remarked that it expected the Uttar Pradesh government to challenge the bail to Ashish Mishra, the son of Union minister Ajay Mishra ‘Teni’, in the Lakhimpur Kheri violence case after the special investigation team (SIT)’s recommendation, even as the state indicated its reluctance to do so, claiming that Mishra is neither a flight risk nor a threat to the witnesses in the case.
Lending tacit support to the February 10 order of the Allahabad high court granting bail to Ashish Mishra, the government added that it did not accept the recommendation of the top court-mandated SIT seeking cancellation of Mishra’s bail since the team’s apprehensions regarding threats to witnesses were not substantiated.
“The main reason cited by the SIT for filing the appeal was that the witnesses can be influenced or threatened. About such a possibility, we have filed an affidavit before this court on March 23, saying there is no such threat. On March 20, we telephonically spoke to each and every witness and they said they don’t have any threat… Thus, the reason cited by SIT did not appeal to us,” senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, representing the UP government, told a bench led by chief justice of India NV Ramana.
While the court reserved its order on a petition by the victim’s families seeking the cancellation of Mishra’s bail, Jethmalani justified the state’s decision not to challenge the high court order immediately after the SIT’s recommendations.
“Bail is not supposed to be punitive. If he is a repeat offender or a flight-risk, there could be different considerations. But that may not be the case here. He (Mishra) is not a flight-risk. Besides, we have provided extensive security to all the witnesses and there has not been a single untoward incident since February 10 (when the bail was given),” Jethmalani argued.
The senior counsel’s submissions came after the bench, which also included justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli, observed that it is for the UP government to finally decide whether to file an appeal against the grant of bail to Mishra or not. “We can’t insist. It is your choice whether you want to file the appeal or not. We sent the SIT’s report to you and these reports are dated February 10 and February 14. You are now saying you need more time to decide. This is not a matter where you have to wait for months and years together…we expected the state to act on the suggestions of the SIT,” the bench told Jethmalani at the outset of the hearing on Monday.
On November 17, the bench set up a new SIT to probe the violence and inducted three IPS officers. The court, which initiated suo motu (on its own motion) proceedings into the matter, also appointed former Punjab and Haryana high court judge Rakesh Kumar Jain to monitor the probe into the violence, which claimed eight lives on October 3, 2021.
After Mishra was granted bail by the high court on February 10, a petition seeking its cancellation was filed in the top court by family members of the three victims.
