The Supreme Court on Monday questioned Allahabad High Court’s logic behind examining the post-mortem reports of the farmers killed in the Lakhimpur Kheri violence while granting bail to Ashis Mishra, the prime accused and son of Union minister Ajay Mishra.
The apex court took note of the fact that the Uttar Pradesh government failed to file a special leave petition (SLP) against the high court’s order as suggested by the Supreme Court-appointed special investigation team (SIT).
Ashish pleaded he might have to remain behind bars for long if his bail was cancelled.
Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana asked senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, appearing for the state: “How can the judge (the high court) go into the post-mortem report as to whether the victim suffered bullet injuries…?”
Justice Ramana added: “This way of going into the merits and describing the wounds, etc, is all completely unnecessary, while considering bail application.”
The court made the observation after senior advocate Dushyant Dave, along with advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the victims’ families, challenged the bail granted by the high court on February 10, contending that it was given on irrelevant considerations. They cited instances where the judge had quoted from the post-mortem report to infer that the farmers had suffered bullet injuries and were not crushed by the convoy of vehicles carrying Ashis and his followers.
Senior advocate Ranjit Kumar, appearing for Ashis, said the high court had gone into the issue of bullet wounds as one of the victims had died of gunshot injuries.
The Supreme Court bench, which included Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli, asked the senior counsel why the state government did not file an SLP when Justice (retd) Rakesh Kumar Jain, heading the SIT, wrote to the Uttar Pradesh government twice seeking cancellation of Ashis’s bail.
“We are asking you a question. Why did you not challenge the bail? You know the circumstances under which we formed the SIT and requested a retired judge from Punjab and Haryana High Court to investigate the matter. You yourself (Jethmalani) admit the offence is very serious and grave. You say you have vehemently opposed the bail application of the accused in the high court.
“We expected you to have acted on the suggestion of the SIT and the monitoring judge to appeal against the bail. But you did not,” Justice Ramana told Jethmalani while expressing the bench’s displeasure at the state’s conduct.
The apex court brushed aside Jethmalani’s submission that the report was under consideration of the state government with regard to filing of the SLP.
“We can’t force you. You didn’t respond when the letter was written. This is not a matter where you should wait,” the bench said.
Kumar pleaded that the top court send back the issue to Allahabad High Court for fresh consideration of the bail plea.
“If your Lordships cancel my bail, where will I (Ashis) go again? I will be in jail for all time to come. Or till the time the trial is completed, which would take several years. Instead, I would request your Lordships to consider remanding the matter to the high court,” Kumar said.
CJI Ramana said: “We will do what we have to do.”
Later, the bench reserved its verdict.
Justice (retd) Jain had in a report to the apex court said the SIT had meticulously analysed all the evidence collected during the investigation and they clearly established that the accused persons, including Ashis, had gone to the scene of the crime in a premeditated manner in a convoy of three vehicles that they drove at a very high speed on a narrow road that was full of people gathered to protest.
According to the SIT, the accused escaped by firing in the air.
