Supreme Court directs Yogi govt to replace public prosecutor in Lakhimpur case

The Supreme Court ordered Uttar Pradesh to replace the prosecutor in the Lakhimpur violence trial after concerns about crucial witnesses not being presented.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Uttar Pradesh government to replace the public prosecutor conducting the Lakhimpur violence trial against Ashish Mishra, son of former Union minister Ajay Mishra, after the victims told the court that the prosecutor was giving up crucial eyewitnesses in the case.

Ashish Mishra and others accused in the Lakhimpur Kheri violence case. (PTI)

Mishra is accused of mowing down farmers who had gathered to protest against the now-repealed farm laws in 2021 when his father was a central government minister.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 bench, also comprising justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, said, “What is unusual is that on a given date when the witnesses are called, why should the public prosecutor give up those witnesses. They are eyewitnesses. This may not be a very fair prosecution if the public prosecutor gives up on witnesses.”

The order was passed on an application moved by the victims raising concerns over the prosecutor giving up on crucial witnesses and the presiding officer intimidating witnesses by issuing non-bailable warrants against a witness who sought exemption from appearance on medical grounds.

“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 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 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. The bench said that the judicial officer cannot be faulted for issuing NBW when this court is constantly issuing orders to expedite the trial.

The bench said, “We can understand the trial court’s sense of urgency where the warrant goes to the witness and the prosecutor is unable to produce a witness. You also have been praying for the trial to be expedited. Maybe there is a genuine case where a witness is not there. It is for the public prosecutor to inspire confidence that the witness is not appearing due to genuine difficulty.”

A total of eight people were killed in the Lakhimpur Kheri violence. Mishra was arrested within six days of the incident. According to the police charge sheet, 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. 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.

A separate criminal case in this regard was registered by police against four farmers who, too, are out on bail.