The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a petition to stop the prosecution of Sarfaraz Ansari, connected to the late gangster Mukhtar Ansari, in the Usri Chatti massacre case, allowing the trial to proceed.

Key Points
- Allahabad High Court rejected a plea to quash prosecution against Sarfaraz Ansari in the Usri Chatti massacre case.
- The court noted that a chargesheet has been filed and a key witness has testified in the case.
- The case relates to a 2001 incident where Mukhtar Ansari's group was attacked, resulting in multiple deaths.
- In 2023, an FIR was lodged alleging that Manoj Rai was abducted and murdered by associates of Mukhtar Ansari.
The Allahabad High Court on Monday rejected a plea seeking quashing of prosecution proceedings against Sarfaraz Ansari alias Munni, an alleged sharpshooter linked to deceased gangster-politician Mukhtar Ansari, in connection with the Usri Chatti massacre case in Ghazipur district.
Court Upholds Prosecution in Usri Chatti Massacre
Justice Rajiv Singh of the Lucknow bench of high court observed that a chargesheet has already been filed before the trial court and charges have been framed against the petitioner.
The court also noted that the testimony of a key witness, Shailendra Kumar Rai, father of the deceased Manoj Rai, has been recorded.
"In such circumstances, there is no justification for quashing the entire prosecution proceedings by exercising powers at this stage," the court said.
Details of the Usri Chatti Incident
According to the petition, the incident dates back to 2001 when a group led by Brijesh Singh allegedly attacked Mukhtar Ansari's group, resulting in multiple deaths, including that of Manoj Rai, who was said to be associated with the rival faction.
However, in 2023, Manoj Rai's father lodged an FIR at Mohammadabad police station in Ghazipur, alleging that his son had been abducted from Buxar in Bihar and murdered by associates of Mukhtar Ansari, who later portrayed his death as part of the Usri Chatti incident.
During investigation, Sarfaraz Ansari's name surfaced and a chargesheet was filed, following which trial proceedings commenced.
Opposing the plea, Additional Advocate General V K Shahi argued that the 2001 incident and the 2023 FIR were based on different sets of facts and that the ongoing prosecution was legally sustainable.







