The Supreme Court on Monday, 4 April reserved the order on the petition seeking cancellation of the bail of prime accused Ashish Mishra in the Lakhimpur Kheri case.
The plea was filed by families of the farmers killed on 3 October, 2021 in Lakhimpur Kheri after being run over by an SUV belonging to Ashish Mishra, the son of MoS Ajay Teni Mishra.
Representing the Uttar Pradesh government, senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani maintained the government's stand that the offence was a grave one, but added that "Ashish Mishra is not a flight risk."
He also said that the state was "unimpressed" by the SIT's argument that Ashish Mishra is an influential person and could tamper with evidence while being out on bail.
What the Petitioners Argued in SC
Representing the petitioners, senior advocate Dushyant Dave pointed out the inconsistencies and lapses in the probe and the basis on which bail was granted by the Allahabad High Court.
Dave, as quoted by Bar&Bench (B&B), said that the HC had "failed to consider relevant facts and the judgment suffers from gross non-application of mind."
The apex court further took note of the fact that none of the witnesses were heard by the High Court.
Appearing for Ashish Mishra, senior counsel Ranjit Kumar, argued that "crucial sentences were missing from the FIR" when it was translated from Hindi to English.
What UP Govt Said
Jethmalani said that the stand of the UP government remains the same as it was earlier that "no words are enough" to condemn the incident and that it had "vehemently" opposed the bail in the high court.
However, Jethmalani said that the witnesses are not under any threat of being compromised by Ashish Mishra as extensive security has been provided to them.
"We have filed an affidavit saying witnesses have been provided extensive security. We have contacted all 97 witnesses and they all said no threat perception," Jethmalani said, as quoted by B&B.
Jethmalani further said that the "accused in not a flight risk."
Pulling up the state, CJI NV Ramana asked the UP government to clarify its stand on the bail and said that "state should have acted upon the recommendation of the SIT to file an appeal here against the bail order."
Jethmalani responded saying that the SIT had asked the state to appeal against the bail application since Ashish Mishra was an influential person and could tamper with the evidence "but that did no impress" them.
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)