Supreme Court on Manipur Mayhem: An Update

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Sukla Sen

unread,
Jul 31, 2023, 11:18:26 PM7/31/23
to foil-l, Discussion list about emerging world social movement

Here, it bears recalling that the same Supreme Court had summarily rejected the plea asking it to look into the politically motivated misuse of the ED to suppress the opponents/critics of the regime without even bothering to ask for the break-up of the ED cases -- active and frozen.
Had the Court done so, at that time, maybe -- only maybe -- today Manipur would have not happened.

Never mind. 
Better late than never.

I/II.
The Supreme Court on July 31 said it needed a complete break-up of the “approximately 6,000 First Information Reports [FIRs]“ the Manipur government claimed to have registered during the ethnic clashes in the State, including cases of murder, rape, arson, crimes against women, burning of villages, homes and places of worship.

The court listed the case for August 1 at 2 p.m..

A three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud was surprised to find the Centre and the State groping for facts about crimes which are “public knowledge reported widely in the national media”.

The court was shocked to know that the Manipur police took 14 whole days to register even a ‘Zero FIR’ (an FIR that can be filed in any police station) on the sexual assault and gangrape of two women in Thoubal district on May 4. The case was transferred to the police station concerned on June 21. The video of the “horrific” visuals of the sexual violence went viral on July 19. The Supreme Court took suo motu cognisance of the video on July 20. The arrests, seven in number, were made only after the apex court took judicial note.
...
The two women, represented by senior advocate Kapil Sibal, have approached the apex court, objecting to the Centre and the State’s decision to transfer the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). Mr. Siibal alleged “collaboration” between the State police and the mob. He said the police, instead of taking the women away from the mob, took them towards the crowd and abandoned them to their fate. He submitted that one of the women had lost her father and brother to the mob’s violence. There was still no information about their bodies.

The court proposed appointing its own special investigation team. “There are statements made here that people were handed over by the police to the mob. Besides, you [Centre and State] do not want the local police to investigate,” the court reasoned.
...
Chief Justice Chandrachud said the May 4 incident was not an isolated one. “This is apparent from the Home Secretary’s affidavit. As much as we want to give justice to the two women, we also want to put in place a mechanism by which justice is available to all other women. We have to put in a mechanism to ensure complaints are filed, FIRs are lodged… The process of justice should go to the victims’ doorsteps,” the Chief Justice observed.

Mr. Mehta said the government was “serious” and had “nothing to hide”. He said the government was open to the Supreme Court monitoring the investigation. ”There is nothing greater than the Supreme Court monitoring,” the law officer said.
...
But the court asked whether the Thoubal incident was a “standalone” instance of perpetration of violence on women in Manipur during the clashes.

“Let us say for example if there are 1,000 of them, will the CBI be able to cope? How many such FIRs are there really? Here we are dealing with systemic acts of violence committed in the course of communal and sectarian strife,” the court told the government.

The Bench said it had to first see a “breakdown” of the 6,000 FIRs the government was said to have registered.

“What is the bifurcation of the 6,000 FIRs? How many crimes against women; how many involve serious offences like murder, bodily harm to women, burning of villages, homes, places of worship. What is the breakdown of these FIRs?” the Chief Justice asked.

The court sought details of the zero FIRs filed by the police, the action taken on them and in how many cases the Magistrates had ordered investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The court also asked the government to provide details of any relief package it proposed to offer the victims.


II:
The court asked the Centre how many of around 6,000 FIRs filed since the violence broke out in Manipur were for crimes against women. The Centre said it did not have a break-up of such cases. The Supreme Court then directed the Centre and the Manipur government to return tomorrow with information on six points:

1.   Break-up of cases
2.   How many zero FIRs
3.   How many transferred to the police station that has jurisdiction
4.   How many arrested so far
5.   Status of legal aid to the arrested accused
6.   How many Section 164 statements (or statements before the nearest magistrate) recorded so far

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages