India

Lakhimpur Kheri Violence: Union Minister’s son Ashish Mishra sent on 3-day police remand

Naveen Bharat Editorial

LUCKNOW: Ashish Mishra, the main accused in Lakhimpur Kheri violence and son of junior union minister Ajay Mishra, has been sent to three-day police remand with conditions, said prosecution lawyer SP Yadav on Monday.

The hearing on the remand petition of Ashish’s police custody was held on Monday. He was sent to 14-day judicial custody by a local court after he was arrested late on Saturday night.

He was questioned for nearly 12 hours on Saturday in connection with the Lakhimpur Kheri violence in which eight people, including four farmers, were killed. Prosecution lawyer Yadav said that a medical team examined Ashish Mishra at the crime branch office in Lakhimpur Kheri, after which he was produced before a judicial magistrate, who remanded him in custody.

The three conditions put by the court for police remand include his medical examination by the SIT every time he is interrogated, no torture by the police during interrogation and permission for his lawyer to see him from a distance during interrogation.

Read also | Congress leaders observed ‘silent fast’ in protest against Lakhimpur Kheri violence

Although Ashish insisted that he was not in the car that hit the protesters from behind, leading to violence that killed eight people, including farmers and a journalist, police officials claimed that they had a spot on the spot. There is evidence to show his presence.

It was Ashish’s Mahindra Thar SUV that crashed on farmers last Sunday around 3 pm when farmers were protesting against UP Deputy Chief Minister Keshav Maurya’s visit to Lakhimpur Kheri. Though he avoided questions about his role in the horrific incident, sources claimed that he failed to provide satisfactory evidence about his whereabouts between 2.36 pm and 3.30 pm on that horrific Sunday.

Ashish claimed that he was participating in a dangal (wrestling match) at that time in his native village Banbirpur and submitted videos and affidavits of 10 people to substantiate his claim, but the SIT was not impressed.

“I was not present at the scene,” was his standard answer to most questions, he said: “I found out about it later.”

But when the police were asked about the bullets found in his car, which were burnt by angry protesters at the site, he was hesitant. Sources said that he also did not give a satisfactory answer to the question about the licensed weapon with him and who was with him. The name he mentioned was that of Hariom, whom he claimed was driving the SUV.

Back to top button