Santoshanand Avadhut @ Ghanshyam Prasad & Anr vs Central Bureau Of Investigation

$~3& 4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
Date of Decision: 24 February, 2026.
th
Uploaded on: 26 February, 2026.
+ CRL.A. 91/2015&CRL.M.A. 32334/2025
SANTOSHANAND AVADHUT @ GHANSHYAM PRASAD &
ANR .....Appellants
Through: Ms. Sima Gulati and Mr. Pankaj
Yadav, Advocates.
versus
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, SPP-CBI with Ms.
Mishika Pandita, Mr. Changez Khan
and Mr. Siddharth Shekhar, Advs.
~4 AND
+ CRL.A. 130/2015&CRL.M.A. 15461/2021
SUDEVANAND AVADHOOT @ RAMCHANDRA @ BHARAT @
DOCTOR @ MISRI LAL YADAV .....Appellant
Through: Ms. Sima Gulati and Mr. Pankaj
Yadav, Advocates.
versus
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ( CBI) .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, SPP-CBI with Ms.
Mishika Pandita, Mr. Changez Khan
and Mr. Siddharth Shekhar, Advs.
Mr. Ajit Sharma, Ms. Kanchan, Mr.
Raghav Sood and Mr. Aditya Jha,
Advocates.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 91/2015 & CRL.A. 130/2015 Page 1 of 6
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:26.02.2026
15:20:14

nd
2. An incident occurred on 2 January, 1975 leading to the unfortunate
demise of Sh. L.N. Mishra, the then Railway Minister, Government of India
at the Samastipur Railway Station in Bihar. The said incident is at the core of
these two appeals. There were a total of three persons who had passed away
in the said incident and 18 persons were injured.
3. The said incident was initially investigated by the State C.I.D., Bihar
and the same was thereafter, handed over to the Central Bureau of
Investigation (hereinafter, ‘CBI’ ) within a span of 2 to 3 days itself. The CBI
had then taken over the investigation and the matter is stated to have been
overseen by the then Director, CBI, namely, Sh. D. Sen. In the said
investigation, initially, two individuals, namely, Sh. Arun Kumar Mishra and
th
Sh. Arun Kumar Thakur were arrested by the CBI on 8 February, 1975.
4 The statements of Sh. Arun Kumar Mishra and Sh. Arun Kumar Thakur
under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter,
‘Cr.P.C.’ ) were recorded on at least two occasions. After the arrest of the said
persons, sometime in July-August of 1975, the investigation took a different
turn and individuals belonging to a particular sect namely, Anand Margis
were made the Accused persons and were arrested.
5. This turn in the investigation was on the basis of the statements given
by two individuals, namely, Sh. Madan Mohan Shrivastava @
Visheshwaranand as also Sh. Bikram @ Jaldhar Dass. The CBI, thereafter,
arrested Anand Margis’ i.e., followers of Anand Marg in July-August of 1975,
suspected to be involved in the present offence. The arrested Anand Margis’
include the present two Appellants.
6. The initial two Accused persons who were arrested i.e., Sh. Arun
Kumar Mishra and Sh. Arun Kumar Thakur were discharged by the
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 91/2015 & CRL.A. 130/2015 Page 2 of 6
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:26.02.2026
15:20:14

th
Magistrate Court in Bihar vide order dated 20 November, 1975.
7. In the year 1975, post the time when the present incident had taken
place, it is a matter of public knowledge that a National Emergency had been
imposed which was finally withdrawn after a period of 18 months.
8. After the lifting of the National Emergency, the then Chief Minister of
Bihar had directed a secret inquiry to be conducted into the whole matter and
th
a report was sought. The said report was prepared and is dated 24 October,
1978. The same is relied upon by the family of Sh. L.N. Mishra, who is
appearing before this Court as the victim’s family, as also by the Appellants
who were Anand Margis’. The Appellants submit that they have been wrongly
convicted in the present case.
th
9. The trial of the present case was transferred to Delhi on 17 December,
1979 and after a period of almost 40 years, from the date of incident, the trial
concluded and the judgement dated 8th December, 2014 was rendered by the
ld. Sessions Judge, Shahdara, Karkardooma Court, Delhi convicting five of
the Accused persons. Out of the five Accused persons, three persons have
passed away and the remaining two are the Appellants before this Court.
10. Initially, when these appeals were filed, the Predecessor Bench had,
th
vide order dated 7 April, 2015 considered various factors including the
period of incarceration which the Appellants had undergone and certain other
glaring facts such as their alleged absence from the railway station on the
fateful day, etc. and accordingly, their sentences were suspended.
11. During the pendency of these appeals, the victim’s family consisting of
his grandson – Mr. Vaibhav Mishra, an Advocate sought to intervene and also
prayed for being heard fully in the matter. In the said process, he had filed an
application being I.A. 17605/2021 in CRL.A. 91/2015 and a writ petition
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 91/2015 & CRL.A. 130/2015 Page 3 of 6
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:26.02.2026
15:20:14

being W.P.(Crl) 201/2023 titled ‘Vaibhav Mishra v. Central Bureau of
Investigation & Ors.’ . Initially, Mr. Mishra was permitted to assist the
prosecution, however, W.P.(Crl.) 201/2023 finally culminated in the order of
th
the Supreme Court dated 13 October, 2023 in SLP(Crl) No. 013467 / 2023
titled ‘Vaibhav Mishra v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors.’ wherein
the Supreme Court directed as under:
“1. Delay condoned.
2. After arguing the case for some time, learned counsel
for the petitioner seeks and is permitted to withdraw this
petition with liberty to assist the Division Bench of Delhi
High Court at the time of final hearing of the criminal
appeals filed by the convicts, in accordance with law.
3. The special leave petition is dismissed as withdrawn
with liberty as aforesaid.”
th
12. The present matter continued to remain pending and on 11 November,
2025, the matter was adjourned at the request of Mr. Rajesh Kumar, ld. SPP,
th
CBI to 24 February, 2026 i.e., for today.
th
13. This order dated 11 November, 2025 was challenged before the
Supreme Court in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) 1742/2026
titled ‘Vaibhav Mishra v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.’ where
th
the following order dated 11 February, 2026 has been passed by the Supreme
Court:
“1. Criminal Appeal no.91/2015 is being heard by
the High Court. We have no reason to doubt that with
the able assistance and cooperation of the learned
counsel for the parties, the High Court will make an
endeavour to decide the same at the earliest.
2. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, disposed
of.
3. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed
of.”
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 91/2015 & CRL.A. 130/2015 Page 4 of 6
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:26.02.2026
15:20:14

14. In terms of the above order passed by the Supreme Court, it has been
directed that an endeavour is to be made to decide these appeals at the earliest.
15. Accordingly, today, these matters have been taken up for hearing.
Detailed submissions have been heard for more than an hour and a half.
16. Mr. Ajit Sharma along with Mr. Vaibhav Mishra, ld. Counsels for the
victim’s family have made their submissions. After hearing them and going
through some of the record, which is quite voluminous, it is clear that the
stand of the victim’s family is that the course of investigation was deliberately
changed leading to conviction of the Appellants. The prayer of the victim’s
family is that the matter deserves to be re-investigated. In support of this
th
submission, the report dated 24 October, 1978 prepared by Mr. S.B. Sahai,
Cabinet (Vigilance) Department, Bihar, Patna is relied upon to argue that the
main conspirators and planners, who had executed the killing of Sh. L.N.
Mishra have neither been implicated and have been given a complete clean
chit. According to the victim’s family, the same includes one Sh. Ram Vilas
Jha, who was at the relevant point in time a Member of the Legislative Council
in Bihar and was named by one of the persons who was investigated.
17. The Appellants are represented by Ms. Gulati, ld. Counsel who
obviously support the prayer for re-investigation as their case is that they have
been wrongly implicated in the present case.
18. The Court has put a pointed query to Mr. Rajesh Kumar, ld. SPP for
CBI as to what is the stand of the CBI i.e., whether it supports re-investigation
or whether it supports the conviction of the Appellants in terms of the
impugned judgment dated 8th December, 2014.
19. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, ld. SPP submits that he has received oral
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 91/2015 & CRL.A. 130/2015 Page 5 of 6
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:26.02.2026
15:20:14

instructions to support the judgment passed by the Sessions Court in Delhi,
but there is no affidavit or status report filed on record.
20. Accordingly, let a status report be filed by the CBI taking a stand on
this aspect. The said report shall be filed by an officer of not less than the rank
of the Joint Director.
21. The status report shall be filed by the CBI at least two days before the
next date of hearing.
22. Counsels for the Parties are permitted to obtain the electronic copy of
the Court record including the Trial Court Record as also the paperbook and
make their submissions on the next date of hearing.
th
23. List on 25 March, 2026 on top of the Board. Considering the
th
directions given by the Supreme Court vide order dated, 11 February 2026,
no adjournment slip shall be entertained and no adjournments shall be
granted.
24. The present matters shall be treated as part-heard.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
(JUDGE)
MADHU JAIN
(JUDGE)
FEBRUARY 24, 2026
Rahul/ck
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 91/2015 & CRL.A. 130/2015 Page 6 of 6
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR
Signing Date:26.02.2026
15:20:14