Lakhimpur Kheri Case | 'How Long Should Ashish Mishra Be Kept Inside?' : Supreme Court Asks Trial Court To Inform Time Needed For Trial

While considering the application filed by Asish Mishra, son of Union Minister Ajay Mishra, seeking bail in the Lakhimpur Kheri case, the Supreme Court on Monday asked the trial court to indicate the time which will be tentatively required to conclude the trial without affecting the schedule of other pending matters.A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Krishna Murari directed the Registrar (Judicial) to find out from the first Additional Sessions judge at Lakhimpur Kheri as to how much time the trial is likely to take to conclude in the normal case without compromising with other pending or prioritised matters. Observing that a balance should be struck between the rights of the victims and the accused, the bench asked if Mishra can be kept indefinitely behind the bars as an undertrial. While Mishra claimed that he was not present at the crime spot, the State and the victims opposed grant of bail to him. Highlighting the grave nature of the crime, the victims urged the Court to not release Mishra, saying that it will expose the witnesses to danger. However, the bench pointed out that the witnesses have been granted protection as per the orders of the Court.Mishra is facing murder charges for allegedly killing persons in the Lakhimpur Kheri violence of October 2021 after his vehicle allegedly ran over farmers who were protesting against farm laws.The Court also directed the State of UP to inform the status of investigation relating to the case filed against farmers for allegedly lynching three others, including the driver of Mishra's car.Was not present at the crime spot, Mishra arguesSenior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Mishra, argued that he was not there in the car when the incident took place and that no person died due to the alleged gun firing by him.He said that the photographs which are part of the record shows that the person in the car was one Sumit Jaiswal. The senior lawyer claimed that Mishra was not at the scene of the crime and was elsewhere where a wrestling match was going on and that there are records of mobile tower locations to prove that.At this juncture, the bench asked what was the distance between the two places, to which Rohatgi replied '4 kilometers'. Justice Kant pointed out that the SIT allegation is that initially, Mishra was at the other location, and when he came to know about the farmers protest gathering, he reached there and then the mishap happened.Rohatgi also referred to certain photographs of the 'dangal' venue to show Mishra's presence there at 2.39 PM, 2.43 PM, 2.58 PM and 3.20 PM. The crime happened at about 2.53 PM. The senior counsel stated that there are eyewitnesses also asserting Mishra's presence at the Dangal site.He said that in the passenger seat of the Thar car, a blue-shirt wearing man is sitting, who is not Mishra and was Sumit Jaiswal. The driver of the car was also pulled out and killed."This is not a case of somebody pre-planning a murder. This is a case where a fracas happened and some people got killed. I have an alibi. There is no conclusive proof of my client being there(at crime site). How is 302 (murder charge) attracted? He has spent over a year in jail", Rohatgi argued.Answering the query of the bench, Rohatgi informed that the case has 200 witnesses.How long should someone be kept inside pending trial? Bench asks State.The bench asked the State of Uttar Pradesh how long should he be kept in the prison as an undertrial."In cases of bail, we consider the seriousness of the crime, the period which the trial will take and also the period spent by the accused. How long should he be in prison?Can he be kept indefinitely? How to balance? The accused has also rights as the victims", Justice Kant asked Additional Advocate General of UP Garima Prashad.Prashad replied that the offences are grave and that there are statements of injured eyewitnesses regarding the presence of Mishra at the crime spot. She also informed the bench that Mishra's discharge application was rejected by the trial court and the charges have been framed against him.Premeditated murder : Victims' lawyer DaveSenior Advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for the relatives of the victims, submitted that in a murder case, the Supreme Court rarely grants bail if it has been rejected by the trial court and the High Court and that "there is nothing special about this case" . Refuting Rohatgi's submissions, Dave submitted that the crime was "premeditated", as there are statements by Mishra's father a few days ago that the protesting farmers "will be taught a lesson"."In 302 cases, this court ordinarily does not interfere when the High Court and the trial court have refused bail. There is no exception in this case", Dave stated. "If someone can kill merely because they are agitating, then nobody is safe in a democracy", he said.Dave also pointed out that the State would not have acted in this case but for the intervention made by the Court. "He is in the custody because of our...

Lakhimpur Kheri Case | 'How Long Should Ashish Mishra Be Kept Inside?' : Supreme Court Asks Trial Court To Inform Time Needed For Trial

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags