3 hrs ago
Supreme Court Seeks Allahabad HC Report on Lakhimpur Trial Judge
The Supreme Court is checking complaints about the judge handling the Lakhimpur Kheri violence trial.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing victims, said the judge may have handled parts of the case improperly.
He mentioned other cases assigned to the judge, bail decisions, witnesses and a missing site plan.
He also questioned why an eyewitness received a non-bailable warrant after saying he was ill.
Bhushan alleged that police later intimidated the witness’s parents.
Lawyers for Ashish Mishra said the witness had been avoiding court and that the judge was being blamed unfairly.
The Supreme Court asked the Allahabad High Court to examine the allegations and send a private report.
It also told Uttar Pradesh to appoint a senior and experienced prosecutor.
The case concerns violence in 2021 in which eight people were killed.
The Supreme Court asked the Allahabad High Court to examine allegations against the judge handling the 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence trial.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan alleged irregularities involving case assignments, bail decisions, witness handling and a missing site plan.
The High Court was directed to submit a report on its action in a sealed cover before the next hearing.
The Supreme Court directed Uttar Pradesh to appoint a senior and experienced public prosecutor for the case.
The October 2021 violence killed eight people; Ashish Mishra is among the accused and the trial remains under Supreme Court monitoring.
- Who
- The Supreme Court, the Allahabad High Court, advocate Prashant Bhushan, the Uttar Pradesh government, the trial judge and lawyers for Ashish Mishra are involved.
- What
- The Supreme Court sought an Allahabad High Court report on allegations against the trial judge and directed Uttar Pradesh to appoint an experienced public prosecutor.
- Where
- The proceedings concern the Lakhimpur Kheri violence case in Uttar Pradesh, India.
- When
- The directions were issued on September 22, 2026, concerning violence that occurred in October 2021.
- Why
- The directions followed allegations about the trial judge’s handling of cases, witnesses and records, as well as concerns about the experience of the public prosecutor.
Concerns Raised by Victims’ Counsel
Responses from Accused and Authorities
Trial judge’s conduct
Concerns Raised by Victims’ Counsel
Prashant Bhushan alleged that the judge took up cases assigned to other courts, granted bail in some matters and should be removed to prevent a possible miscarriage of justice.
Responses from Accused and Authorities
The Supreme Court said administrative control over the judge rests with the Allahabad High Court and referred the allegations to its Chief Justice for examination.
Eyewitness warrant
Concerns Raised by Victims’ Counsel
Bhushan said Sher Singh had explained his absence with a medical slip and alleged that police intimidated the witness’s parents, after which Singh said he did not want to appear.
Responses from Accused and Authorities
The Chief Justice of India said the trial court could issue a non-bailable warrant when a witness failed to appear without a satisfactory explanation; lawyers for Ashish Mishra also said the witness had been avoiding court.
Prosecution and trial management
Concerns Raised by Victims’ Counsel
Bhushan questioned why three summoned witnesses were not examined, criticized the replacement prosecutor’s limited experience and said the judge’s continued involvement could result in acquittal.
Responses from Accused and Authorities
The Supreme Court directed Uttar Pradesh to appoint a senior and experienced prosecutor, while the State said it would respond on whether a senior prosecutor could be assigned.
Key facts
- Case
- 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence case
- Deaths
- Eight people were killed in the October 2021 violence
- Supreme Court bench
- Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana
- High Court direction
- The Allahabad High Court must examine the allegations and submit a sealed-cover report
- Prosecution direction
- Uttar Pradesh must identify a senior and experienced public prosecutor within two weeks
- Witness issue
- Eyewitness Sher Singh was the subject of a non-bailable warrant
- Missing record
- Prashant Bhushan alleged that the site plan was missing from the trial court record
Quotes
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant
Chief Justice of India and presiding judge on the Supreme Court bench
“There are some very disturbing events which have taken place, which will shock Your Lordships’ conscience as to how this judge, who is currently dealing with it. Apparently, what he has done is quite shocking, not just in this case but in so many other cases”
freepressjournal.in
“Let a copy of this IA also be placed before the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court to take note of, and let a report concerning the IA be submitted before us in a sealed cover before the next date”
freepressjournal.in
Sources
Related news
Supreme Court Keeps Delhi Protest Violence Panel Intact
Supreme Court Rejects Bias Plea in Jantar Mantar Probe
CJI Tells Panel To Prioritize Sexual Assault Complaints
PUCL Urges CJI Action Over Rajasthan High Court Allegations
Pleas Seek Reconstitution of Panel Probing Police Excesses Against Protesters
Supreme Court Rejects Changes to NEET Protest Probe Panel
Kaushambi Firecracker Factory Blast Kills 11, Injures Five
Supreme Court Refuses to Relax Ashish Mishra's Bail Conditions
Hyderabad Celebrates World PR Day 2026
CM Urges Army to Resolve Land, Sainik School Issues
