[ad_1]
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday reserved its verdict on the plea of a Lakhimpur Kheri victim’s father seeking cancellation of the bail awarded to main accused Ashish, son of Union junior home minister Ajay Mishra Teni, while disapproving the manner in which the Allahabad high court had dealt with his bail petition.
A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) N V Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli consistently remarked throughout the 45-minute hearing that “the manner in which the Allahabad high court had gone into the merits of the case – the inquest reports even when the investigations were continuing – was unnecessary for considering a bail plea”.
The UP government walked a tightrope at the Supreme Court on Monday during the hearing of a plea against the bail granted to Ashish Mishra, an accused in the Lakhimpur Kheri case. Through senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, the state argued on one hand it had opposed the grant of bail to Ashish on the ground it was a grave offence which caused the loss of five lives, but, on the other, also saying cancellation of the bail on the apprehension that witnesses will be threatened or influenced did not hold water as police have provided adequate security to each of the 98 witnesses. “He is not a flight risk,” Jethmalani added.
The petitioner through senior advocate Dushyant Dave said the Allahabad HC completely misdirected itself and ignored vital evidence while granting bail to Ashish, whose motorcade is alleged to have ploughed into protesting farmers on October 3 last year killing five persons. The enraged farmers then lynched three occupants of the vehicles before setting one on fireAshish’s counsel Ranjit Kumar said the vehicle driver had received serious head injuries caused by iron rods and lathis because of which he lost control of the vehicle which crushed some people under its wheels. “Ashish was not there at the scene of crime,” he said and produced CCTV footage of a place, which was nearly three kilometres from the crime scene where Ashish was seen just seven minutes before the incident happened. “Ashish could not have travelled the distance, committed the crime and come back all in seven minutes,” Kumar argued.
He pleaded with the court that he was ready to abide by any additional condition imposed by the apex court. “The SC can remand the matter back to the HC for fresh consideration of the bail plea. If the SC cancels the bail, then no court would ever touch his bail plea with a bargepole,” he pleaded. The SC has reserved its verdict.
A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) N V Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli consistently remarked throughout the 45-minute hearing that “the manner in which the Allahabad high court had gone into the merits of the case – the inquest reports even when the investigations were continuing – was unnecessary for considering a bail plea”.
The UP government walked a tightrope at the Supreme Court on Monday during the hearing of a plea against the bail granted to Ashish Mishra, an accused in the Lakhimpur Kheri case. Through senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, the state argued on one hand it had opposed the grant of bail to Ashish on the ground it was a grave offence which caused the loss of five lives, but, on the other, also saying cancellation of the bail on the apprehension that witnesses will be threatened or influenced did not hold water as police have provided adequate security to each of the 98 witnesses. “He is not a flight risk,” Jethmalani added.
The petitioner through senior advocate Dushyant Dave said the Allahabad HC completely misdirected itself and ignored vital evidence while granting bail to Ashish, whose motorcade is alleged to have ploughed into protesting farmers on October 3 last year killing five persons. The enraged farmers then lynched three occupants of the vehicles before setting one on fireAshish’s counsel Ranjit Kumar said the vehicle driver had received serious head injuries caused by iron rods and lathis because of which he lost control of the vehicle which crushed some people under its wheels. “Ashish was not there at the scene of crime,” he said and produced CCTV footage of a place, which was nearly three kilometres from the crime scene where Ashish was seen just seven minutes before the incident happened. “Ashish could not have travelled the distance, committed the crime and come back all in seven minutes,” Kumar argued.
He pleaded with the court that he was ready to abide by any additional condition imposed by the apex court. “The SC can remand the matter back to the HC for fresh consideration of the bail plea. If the SC cancels the bail, then no court would ever touch his bail plea with a bargepole,” he pleaded. The SC has reserved its verdict.
[ad_2]
Source link