New Delhi, October 26 — The Supreme Court on Monday permitted Ashish Mishra, son of former Union minister Ajay Mishra, to visit his hometown in Lakhimpur Kheri, Uttar Pradesh, to celebrate Diwali with his family and close relatives, subject to the conditions imposed earlier, and directed him to return on November 16, LiveLaw reported.

Source: LiveLaw

IANS, in a report carried by Hi India, also said a Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana allowed Mishra's plea for the festival visit, recording that it would be subject to the existing bail conditions, and that senior advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for Mishra, pointed to similar relaxations granted on previous festive occasions.

Source: IANS via Hi India

Mishra is the prime accused in the October 3, 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence case, in which five persons, including four farmers and a journalist, were killed after vehicles allegedly linked to his convoy ran over farmers protesting against the now-repealed farm laws, according to both reports. He was earlier barred from entering Lakhimpur Kheri except to appear in the trial, a condition later relaxed to allow weekend visits.

On the progress of the trial, the Uttar Pradesh government's counsel told the court that a Special Public Prosecutor had been appointed and that 90 of 131 witnesses had been examined, with 41 remaining, LiveLaw reported in its hearing alerts.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the victims' side, expressed satisfaction with the development regarding the transfer of the trial judge, while Dave submitted the transfer was a routine administrative exercise. CJI Surya Kant clarified the court was not saying anything against anyone and that the correctional measures taken by the High Court were good enough, LiveLaw reported.

Stressing the pace of the trial, the Bench observed, as reported by both LiveLaw and IANS: "Let the trial be timely concluded. There should not be a tearing hurry, but there also should not be prolonged delay. Balance has to be maintained by the prosecution." The court recorded that the prosecution would ensure witnesses remain present for examination so that no undue delay is caused.