Supreme Court recorded disappointment at the non-production of witnesses in the trial of Ashish Mishra, son of former Union minister Ajay Mishra, and others in the 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence case. File
| Photo Credit: Sushil Kumar Verma
The Supreme Court on Friday (May 8, 2026) recorded disappointment at the non-production of witnesses in the trial of Ashish Mishra, son of former Union minister Ajay Mishra, and others in the 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence case.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, after perusing a status report filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh, said no witnesses had been examined in the trial in the past two to three months.
The court noted that the State had identified 208 witnesses, pruning their number to 131. The State counsel said 44 witnesses were examined, 15 were discharged and 72 witnesses were yet to be produced.
The Bench said no reason whatsoever was given in the status report as to why the witnesses were not being produced in court for trial.
The case deals with an incident on October 3, 2021 when an SUV, which was part of Mishra’s convoy, allegedly mowed down protestors, including four farmers, protesting the controversial agriculture laws in the Lakhimpur Kheri district of Uttar Pradesh.
In an earlier hearing, the apex court had found that the Sessions Judge hearing the case had 789 pending trials before him. The court had said his burden was ‘humanly impossible’.
The Bench, in its order, directed the Sessions Judge to take lawful measures to secure the presence of witnesses and ensure meticulous compliance of witness protection.
It asked the trial judge to make an endeavour to conclude the trial in a time-bound manner, and also to file a status report in four weeks. .
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the victims’ families, said the local police officers were hand-in-glove with the accused persons. The senior lawyer said efforts have been allegedly made on behalf of the accused persons, through threats and inducements, to not cooperate in the trial proceedings.
Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for Mishra, objected to the allegations made by Mr. Bhushan. He said Mishra has not been able to visit the district for the past five years.
The court had granted interim bail to Mishra in January 2023, even as it described the crime as “ghastly” and “unfortunate”. The court had justified the interim bail as a measure to balance the right of the accused to liberty with the right of the victims to get justice.
In July 2024, the court made the bail absolute and regularised the bail and restricted Mishra’s movement to Delhi or Lucknow.
Published – May 08, 2026 12:02 pm IST
