LAWYER SIBLING LOGO (1)
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • News
  • Updates
  • Constitution
    • Constitutional Laws
  • Laws
    • Civil Law
    • Criminal Law
    • Family Law
    • Real Estate Law
    • Business Law
    • Cyber & IT Law
    • Employee Law
    • Finance Law
    • International Law
  • Special Act
    • Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act)
    • Consumer Protection Act
    • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Act (NDPS)
    • The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO)
  • Bare Act

Lakhimpur Kheri violence: Supreme Court orders expedition of trial, protection to witnesses

08/05/2026BlogNo Comments

The Supreme Court on Friday expressed serious concern over the slow progress of trial proceedings in the 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence cases, particularly noting that no prosecution witness had been examined during the last two months despite coercive processes having been issued by the trial court.

The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi directed the trial court to take all lawful and coercive measures necessary to secure the attendance of witnesses and ensure strict implementation of the witness protection mechanism during the conduct of trial proceedings.

The Apex Court passed the order on a bail petition filed by Ashish Mishra, son of former Union Minister Ajay Mishra, facing prosecution in connection with the October 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence in which five persons, including protesting farmers, were allegedly killed after vehicles linked to his convoy ran over demonstrators during the farm law protests. Mishra continues to remain on interim bail pursuant to earlier orders passed by the Supreme Court.

During the hearing, the State informed the Bench that in the principal trial relating to the deaths of protesting farmers, 44 witnesses had been examined and 15 witnesses discharged, while 72 prosecution witnesses still remained to be examined. In the connected trial relating to subsequent mob violence, 26 out of 35 witnesses had already deposed and nine witnesses remained pending for examination.

Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for Mishra, submitted that no witness examination had taken place for nearly two months despite the trial court having issued both bailable warrants and non-bailable warrants against witnesses for securing their attendance.

The Bench questioned the prosecution regarding the prolonged delay in witness examination and sought an explanation for the lack of progress in trial proceedings. The Chief Justice observed that effective case management and simultaneous summoning of multiple witnesses could substantially expedite the trial process.

Justice Bagchi also referred to the status report placed before the Court and noted that on an earlier occasion, even though a witness had appeared before the trial court, the prosecution had chosen not to examine the witness, thereby causing further delay in completion of evidence.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the victims, alleged before the Court that witnesses were facing intimidation and pressure, resulting in reluctance to appear before the trial court for deposition.

Recording its dissatisfaction with the status report filed by the State authorities, the Supreme Court observed that no satisfactory explanation had been furnished for the repeated non-production of witnesses. The Bench directed the presiding officer conducting both trials to adopt lawful measures for securing witness attendance and ensure adherence to the witness protection scheme so that the trial could proceed without obstruction or intimidation.

The Court further directed the trial court to make all efforts to conclude both criminal trials within a reasonable and time-bound framework.

The Bench also considered a third connected criminal proceeding concerning allegations of witness intimidation. Taking note of the status report indicating that investigation against one accused was still pending despite filing of the chargesheet, the Court directed the investigating officer to complete the remaining investigation and submit the final report before the competent trial court within four weeks.

The criminal proceedings arise out of the October 3, 2021 violence at Tikunia in Lakhimpur Kheri district of Uttar Pradesh, in which eight persons lost their lives during protests against the visit of senior BJP leaders amid the farmers’ agitation against the now-repealed farm laws. One trial concerns the alleged mowing down of protesting farmers by vehicles linked to Ashish Mishra’s convoy, followed by firing incidents, while the second trial relates to the deaths of three persons in the subsequent mob violence.

The post Lakhimpur Kheri violence: Supreme Court orders expedition of trial, protection to witnesses appeared first on India Legal.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • Delhi High Court dismisses Chitra Ramkrishna plea against PC Act in NSE co-location scam case
  • Supreme Court stays criminal proceedings against Hindu man in Madhya Pradesh forced conversion case
  • Delhi High Court designates 85 lawyers as Senior Advocates
  • Centre opposes mandatory disclosure of nicotine, tar content on cigarette packs over risk of misleading consumers
  • Delhi High Court disposes of pleas challenging Show Jumping Team selection after India opts out of Asian Games 2026

Recent Comments

  1. Phone Tracking In India - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  2. Section 437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  3. The Evolution of Indian Penal Code 1860: Key Provisions and Relevance Today - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA

Follow us for more

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
Instagram
DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
All Rights Reserved © 2023
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Forgot Password?
Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.