The Supreme Court emphasized the need to adhere strictly to the law, dismissing the Manipur violence petition. The petition sought contempt charges for alleged non-compliance with the court's order regarding the protection of properties of individuals displaced by the unrest.

Supreme Court's Response to Manipur Violence Petition:

A vacation bench comprising Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal expressed dissatisfaction with the argument that a contempt case had been established against the respondents, including Manipur's Chief Secretary. The justices suggested that the petitioners seek other legal remedies that may be available to them.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, representing Manipur, informed the bench that there was no basis for a contempt case. She emphasized that both the state and the central government are actively working on the ground to address public concerns.

Manipur Violence Petition
Source: NDTV

Ms. Bhati added that the state has a duty to protect everyone and is prepared to file an updated status report on the matter. She said "The effort is to keep the pot boiling which is very unfortunate.”

The Supreme Court was reviewing a petition alleging that the respondents had violated its September 25, 2023, order, which mandated the protection of properties belonging to those displaced by the ethnic conflict.

The bench commented "Who according to you are in contempt?They are not the encroachers. When the advocate mentioned that the petitioners are living outside Manipur and cannot go near, the bench added "That does not mean that notice be issued against the Chief Secretary".

Ms. Bhati referenced last year's order, which gave Manipur and the Centre one week to respond to directives, including ensuring the protection of displaced persons' properties and preventing encroachment. We had filed a status report. We can file an updated status report. Manipur is still in a situation of uneasy calm as we speak. There are conflicting views and the state and central government are trying to assuage everyone.” Ms. Bhati objected when the petitioners' counsel claimed that their properties were looted in the presence of the police and offered to present videos as evidence, arguing that these were baseless allegations.

“They (authorities) are duty-bound to protect the properties. They are duty-bound to carry out the orders of this court and the government. No doubt about it. Don’t pressure officers like this.”The court stated that the petitioners could initiate suitable legal proceedings as allowed by the law. The bench said “All sympathies for you. Your properties need to be protected but that does not mean that we have to issue contempt notice to the respondents.” When the lawyer for the petitioners expressed, "Your lordships may kindly see the message that goes out today", the bench responded, "We must follow the law. We cannot be swayed by emotions."

The bench further added It is needless to say that petitioners shall be at liberty to take recourse to the remedy as may be available under the law if they are aggrieved by any other action or inaction on the part of the respondents,"The bench expressed dissatisfaction with the assertion that contempt proceedings were justified against the respondents regarding the September 25, 2023 order.

In May last year, Manipur faced turmoil and unrest following a high court directive that asked the state government to evaluate the inclusion of the non-tribal Meitei community into the Scheduled Tribes list.

This decision triggered chaos and violence in the region. Since May 3 last year, over 170 individuals have lost their lives and hundreds more have been wounded due to ethnic clashes in the state. The violence initially erupted during a 'Tribal Solidarity March' in the hill districts, which was organised as a response to the majority Meitei community's push for Scheduled Tribe status.

You might also be interested in - Manipur’s ‘sacred’ hill renamed “Kuki Army Camp”; Government intervenes