1. Home
  2. Politics
  3. National
  4. Verdict in Lalit Narayan Mishra murder

Verdict in Lalit Narayan Mishra murder case today

New Delhi: A court here will today deliver its verdict in 39-year-old murder case of then railway minister Lalit Narayan Mishra.On September 12, Judge Vinod Goel had fixed November 10 for pronouncing its verdict in
IANS November 10, 2014 6:55 IST
IANS

New Delhi: A court here will today deliver its verdict in 39-year-old murder case of then railway minister Lalit Narayan Mishra.

On September 12, Judge Vinod Goel had fixed November 10 for pronouncing its verdict in the case after the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and defence counsel of the four accused concluded their final arguments, which had begun September 2012.

Mishra was killed in a bomb blast at a function at the Samastipur railway station in Bihar on January 3, 1975. Gopalji, Ranjan Dwivedi, Santoshanand Avadhuta and Sudevananda Avadhuta are facing trial in the case.

All belong to the Hindu sect Anand Marg. Following the guidelines of the apex court, the lower court here, giving priority to the 39-year old murder case, began hearing the final arguments on the daily basis from September 2012.

Over 160 prosecution witnesses, five court witnesses and around 40 defence witnesses were examined in this case. The charges were framed against the accused six years after the incident in 1981 after the case was transferred to Delhi on the order of the Supreme Court on 1979.

As railway minister, Mishra went to Samastipur Jan 2, 1975, to announce the opening of the Samastipur-Muzaffarpur broad gauge railway line. A bomb explosion on the dais seriously injured him. He was rushed to the railway hospital at Danapur where he died the following day.

The CBI has claimed that Anand Margis carried out the attack on Mishra to put pressure on the government for release of one of the group's leader.

In August 2012, the apex court dismissed the accused's plea on the grounds that the proceedings could not be terminated merely because these had not been concluded in the past 37 years and directed the trial court not to entertain any plea for unwarranted adjournment.