The Supreme Court on Thursday questioned the Uttar Pradesh Police for not acting on a witness’ complaint that he was threatened with “dire consequences” and offered a bribe not to testify in the 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence case involving former Union minister Ajay Mishra’s son Ashish Mishra, Live Law reported.

A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan and N Kotiswar Singh directed the police to verify the allegations.

On June 20, Baljinder Singh filed a written complaint alleging that an unidentified person offered him Rs 1 lakh and threatened him with consequences if he testified in the case, Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the complainant, told the court.

Bhushan added that despite the written complaint, no first information report had been registered, Live Law reported.

The Uttar Pradesh Police reportedly claimed that Singh had not appeared in person, which is why the FIR was not filed. The court said this explanation was unsatisfactory.

“In case the complainant has been reluctant in coming forward in support of his complaint, some senior police officer can be deputed to visit the complainant…to verify if complaint has been made by him,” Live Law quoted the bench as saying. “If such contents are acknowledged it is imperative for police to investigate.”

The court also directed the senior superintendent of police in Lucknow to verify the complaint and file an affidavit along with a fresh status report.

The case pertains to the death of eight persons, including four farmers, on October 3, 2021, as violence had broken out after a vehicle belonging to Ashish Mishra had allegedly run over a group of demonstrators.

The violence had taken place in Lakhimpur Kheri district of Uttar Pradesh during a protest against the Union government’s farm laws that were later repealed.

During the hearing on Thursday, Bhushan also said that if Singh’s allegations were found to be credible, Ashish Mishra’s bail would have to be cancelled. He was granted bail by the Supreme Court in July 2024.

Ashish Mishra’s counsel opposed this, claiming the allegations lacked evidence. He told the court that 20 witnesses had already been examined by the trial court, while another 20 had been dropped by the prosecution.

He also claimed that although the trial court was hearing the case thrice a month, “nobody turns up”.

While Bhushan requested a day-to-day hearing, the bench declined, saying it could impact other pending cases.

It instead asked the trial court to examine as many witnesses as possible on the next hearing scheduled for August 20.