Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain BSP MLA Mukhtar Ansari's Wife's Plea Seeking Protection For His Life

The bench of Justices R Subhash Reddy and Sanjiv Khanna asked Ansari's wife to approach Allahabad High Court.

Stating that Ansari is a well-known political figure who had contested elections successfully in opposition, the petition had argued that there was grave political acrimony and that as Ansari was a witness in several cases wherein influential members of the ruling party are the accused, pressure was being exerted to have him killed.

"The Petitioner is left with no remedy but to approach this Hon'ble Court as there is grave and immediate threat to her husband's life in the State of UP which was also noted by this Hon'ble Court in the judgment dated 26.03.2021," the petition had stated.

Filed by Advocate on Record Parul Shukla, the petition had also sought necessary directions to the Respondents in the UP Home Department, Director-General of Police and Jail Superintendent, Banda Jail, UP, to ensure that the Petitioner's husband could participate in a "free and fair trial in the State and is not killed/encountered in the process".

The plea had cited the judgment of Asha Ranjan v State of Bihar to submit that the Court had the obligation and duty to ensure free and fair trial.

"Thus, this Hon'ble Court has mandated that fair trial in its ambit requires fairness to the accused, to victim, to prosecution and to the collective interest of society at large and no one can claim absolute predominance over the other," plea stated.

Submitting that while the Supreme Court directed in its 26^th March order that the custody of the Petitioner's husband would be handed over to the jail authorities at Banda, the petitioner had sought for the provision of adequate protection for Ansari by the designated authorities so that the trial reached a conclusive end and it did not end in a State-sponsored encounter.

The plea also provided detailed events of past attacks and threats against Mukhtar Ansari in order to substantiate that the threat to his life was not a mere apprehension but had taken place in reality.

It was also submitted that BJP MLAs Brijesh Singh and Tribhuvan Singh, along with their associates tried to attack Ansari in the past and were conspiring to kill him now as he was a witness in cases wherein they are the accused.

"The mafia don Brijesh Singh has become highly influential in the State of UP despite being incarcerated in jail and continues to be a constant threat to the life of Petitioner's husband. The political rivalry between Brijesh Singh and the Petitioner's husband is well known in the State of Uttar Pradesh and associates of Brijesh Singh have been blatantly making public statements to take the Petitioner's husband's life," the petition stated.

Averring that the aforementioned factors clearly portrayed the constant outside interference in the trial of Ansari as well as impending threat to his life, the plea stated that the Petitioner was "in complete fear that now any time an untoward incident can happen to her husband but for protective directions passed by this Hon'ble Court".

The plea had also referred to the encounter of Vikas Dubey wherein the State of UP was highly criticized and submitted that the rights guaranteed to the Petitioner's husband under Article 14 and Article 21 must be protected by the Supreme Court.

It had also contended that the Petitioner has been informed from some sources that "a shooter in the guise of a lawyer along with a lawyer will carry out the murder/ruthless killing of her husband during the course of his appearance before the Special Judge (MP/MLA), UP and these plans are being made at the behest of some higher rank officers at the behest of the Government of Uttar Pradesh".

In light of the above, the plea had sought for necessary directions to be given to the Respondents to ensure that the life of the Petitioner's husband is protected and accordingly, his rights under Article 21 are safeguarded by video graphing his transit from one jail to another and from jail to the Court. Relief for directing his production before Court in the presence of officers of CRPF/BSF was also sought.

Case Title: Afshan Ansari v State of Uttar Pradesh| WP (Crl) 6719 of 2021

Click Here To Read/ Download Order