Lakhimpur Judge Report Ordered
Supreme Court Seeks Allahabad High Court Report on Lakhimpur Trial Judge
Anonymous
Key Points
1
The newly appointed public prosecutor was reported to have only about four months of experience, prompting the Supreme Court to seek a more senior replacement for the trial.
2
The complainants alleged that the site plan connected to the violence had gone missing from the trial-court record and sought the judge’s removal, warning that his continued involvement could cause a “gross miscarriage” of justice.
3
The Bench questioned why three other witnesses who had been summoned had not yet been examined, adding to concerns raised about the handling of witnesses in the trial.
4
The Supreme Court noted that it had previously directed that the trial be expedited and said a trial court could act against witnesses who failed to appear without a satisfactory explanation; Bhushan countered that the ill eyewitness had already submitted a medical explanation.
5
The Registry was specifically ordered to forward the complainant’s application and the Supreme Court’s order to the Allahabad High Court Chief Justice, who was asked to consider appropriate remedial action before submitting the sealed-cover report.
India's Supreme Court intervened in the troubled 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence case on Wednesday, directing the Allahabad High Court to investigate allegations that the trial judge has mishandled the proceedings. OMM Com News reported that the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court must examine the claims and submit a sealed report after taking any necessary action. The case stems from violence that killed eight people, including four farmers, during a protest in Uttar Pradesh.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan raised multiple concerns on behalf of victims and eyewitnesses. Free Press Journal reported that allegations include the judge taking over cases assigned to other courts, granting bail or acquittals to accused persons, and pressuring witnesses. The Supreme Court also ordered Uttar Pradesh to assign a more experienced public prosecutor within two weeks, citing the current prosecutor's limited four-month background.
Judge Accused of Taking Cases Out of Turn
The trial judge has allegedly reassigned cases meant for other courts under drug and minority-protection laws, Rediff reported. Bhushan claimed the judge granted bail or acquittals to accused persons in these cases. The Supreme Court found these allegations serious enough to order an immediate investigation by the Allahabad High Court leadership. A sealed report is required after any corrective steps are taken.
The complainants also alleged that a critical site plan from trial court records went missing. Law Beat stated they urged the judge's removal, warning his continued involvement risked a "gross miscarriage" of justice. The Bench expressed concern that three other summoned witnesses had still not been examined.
Witness Pressure and Missing Medical Consideration
One eyewitness fell ill and could not appear in court. Free Press Journal reported that police allegedly pressured the witness's family after a non-bailable warrant was issued against him. The Supreme Court questioned the warrant's validity when a medical explanation had already been submitted by the witness. Bhushan challenged the court order on these grounds.
The case involves serious questions about how the trial court treats witnesses. The Supreme Court noted it had previously ordered trial expediting but acknowledged that witnesses with valid medical reasons deserve protection. The delay in examining three other witnesses further raises concerns about the trial's fairness and momentum.
New Prosecutor and the Path Forward
The public prosecutor assigned to the trial had only four months of experience, the Supreme Court found. Rediff reported that the court ordered Uttar Pradesh to appoint a senior, experienced replacement within two weeks. This decision reflects the court's concern that the case requires seasoned legal expertise given its high-profile nature and victim sensitivity.
The Supreme Court's intervention signals growing impatience with the trial's progress. Law Beat noted the Registry will forward Bhushan's application and the court's orders to the Allahabad High Court Chief Justice. That official must consider appropriate remedial action before filing the sealed-cover report. The next two weeks will determine whether the trial can finally move forward fairly.
Sentiment
Mostly NegativeNEGATIVENEUTRALPOSITIVE
Publishers
14
Articles
11
Reach
25
Topics
A
AnonymousAuthor
