Express News Service
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday said the trial in the 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence case, in which Union minister Ajay Kumar Mishra’s son Ashish is among those facing prosecution, is not “slow-paced” and directed the concerned sessions judge to keep apprising it about the future developments of the trial.
The remark was made by a bench of Justice Surya Kant and JK Maheshwari. “We are receiving reports regularly from the trial Judge. Some witnesses have been examined partly. Cross-examination took place in part,” the bench had remarked.
The report was submitted in compliance with SC’s January 25 order which it had passed in the bail application filed by Mishra. While granting Mishra interim bail of eight weeks SC had directed the lower court to submit the progress of the report of the trial to it after every date of hearing with details of witnesses examined on each date.
The court on Tuesday also directed for a continuation of its interim order. For Mishra, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi submitted that his client has been attending all the hearings pursuant to the grant of bail.
Although advocate Prashant Bhushan expressed concerns with regard to the pace at which the trial was proceeding, the bench said, “We can assure you that trial is not slow-paced.”
The court also said that it in future might withdraw its order when the trial is on the right path & the proceedings are continuing “smoothly” but right now the same was required.
Also in the top court
‘Thackeray faction wanted Speaker to usurp powers of EC’
The ruling Eknath Shinde camp in Maharashtra told the SC on Tuesday the rival side led by Uddhav Thackeray wanted the Speaker of the state assembly to “usurp” the powers of the Election Commission when the floor test was ordered by the Governor during the 2022 political crisis. Senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, appearing for the Shinde bloc, told a five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud that a nine-judge constitution bench of the apex court had in its 1994 verdict said a floor test is the litmus test of democracy and a chief minister cannot shy away from it.
Nagaland govt to ensure fair elections
On being informed that the Nagaland government has deliberated on the conduct of the urban local body (ULB) elections by May 16 this year with 33% women reservation, the Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the state election commission and the state govt to make arrangements to ensure a free and fair election is conducted. The bench headed by Justice SK Kaul said that individuals in violations would be in breach of orders of this court. The court also directed for not to disturb the schedule and the election process to be conducted as per schedule.
Plea to challenge ‘special class’ of advocates
The SC has agreed to hear a plea filed by advocate Mathews J Nedumpara against designating advocates as “senior” under Sections 16 and 23(5) of the Advocates Act, 1961, on March 20. It was argued in the plea that a special class of advocates with special rights, privileges and status is not available to ordinary advocates, is unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. This has created a class of advocates with special rights which has been reserved only for the kith and kin of judges and senior advocates, politicians, ministers etc., resulting in the legal industry being “monopolised”.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday said the trial in the 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence case, in which Union minister Ajay Kumar Mishra’s son Ashish is among those facing prosecution, is not “slow-paced” and directed the concerned sessions judge to keep apprising it about the future developments of the trial.
The remark was made by a bench of Justice Surya Kant and JK Maheshwari. “We are receiving reports regularly from the trial Judge. Some witnesses have been examined partly. Cross-examination took place in part,” the bench had remarked.
The report was submitted in compliance with SC’s January 25 order which it had passed in the bail application filed by Mishra. While granting Mishra interim bail of eight weeks SC had directed the lower court to submit the progress of the report of the trial to it after every date of hearing with details of witnesses examined on each date. googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });
The court on Tuesday also directed for a continuation of its interim order. For Mishra, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi submitted that his client has been attending all the hearings pursuant to the grant of bail.
Although advocate Prashant Bhushan expressed concerns with regard to the pace at which the trial was proceeding, the bench said, “We can assure you that trial is not slow-paced.”
The court also said that it in future might withdraw its order when the trial is on the right path & the proceedings are continuing “smoothly” but right now the same was required.
Also in the top court
‘Thackeray faction wanted Speaker to usurp powers of EC’
The ruling Eknath Shinde camp in Maharashtra told the SC on Tuesday the rival side led by Uddhav Thackeray wanted the Speaker of the state assembly to “usurp” the powers of the Election Commission when the floor test was ordered by the Governor during the 2022 political crisis. Senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, appearing for the Shinde bloc, told a five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud that a nine-judge constitution bench of the apex court had in its 1994 verdict said a floor test is the litmus test of democracy and a chief minister cannot shy away from it.
Nagaland govt to ensure fair elections
On being informed that the Nagaland government has deliberated on the conduct of the urban local body (ULB) elections by May 16 this year with 33% women reservation, the Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the state election commission and the state govt to make arrangements to ensure a free and fair election is conducted. The bench headed by Justice SK Kaul said that individuals in violations would be in breach of orders of this court. The court also directed for not to disturb the schedule and the election process to be conducted as per schedule.
Plea to challenge ‘special class’ of advocates
The SC has agreed to hear a plea filed by advocate Mathews J Nedumpara against designating advocates as “senior” under Sections 16 and 23(5) of the Advocates Act, 1961, on March 20. It was argued in the plea that a special class of advocates with special rights, privileges and status is not available to ordinary advocates, is unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. This has created a class of advocates with special rights which has been reserved only for the kith and kin of judges and senior advocates, politicians, ministers etc., resulting in the legal industry being “monopolised”.
