Mate was arrested in May 2025 in connection with attacks on security forces that left two personnel dead in January 2024. The court noted inconsistencies between the NIA’s FIRs and arrest memos, including conflicting accounts about whether one or two security personnel were killed in the same incident.
BY PC Bureau
September 26, 2025 – The Gauhati High Court has granted bail to Thangminlen Mate, also known as Lenin Mate, a 28-year-old resident of H.T. Gamnomphai, Tengnoupal district, Manipur, in a criminal appeal (Crl.A./285/2025) against the National Investigation Agency (NIA). Mate is identified as a member of the Kuki Inpi Tengnoupal (KIT) insurgent group.
The order, delivered on September 25 by Justices Michael Zothankhuma and Anjan Moni Kalita, overturned a June 25 ruling of the Special Judge, NIA, Assam, Guwahati, which had rejected Mate’s bail plea.
Mate was first arrested by the NIA on May 19, 2025, at Silchar Police Station in connection with FIR No. 26(1)/2024, later renumbered as RC-05/2024/NIA/IMP. The case involved charges under the IPC, UAPA, Explosive Substances Act, and Arms Act, relating to an attack on an Indian Reserve Battalion (IRB) post and the death of Rifleman W. Somorjit Meitei during a January 17, 2024, gunfight at Moreh Bazar. He secured bail in this case on June 18 and was released two days later.
READ: Voice of Ladakh Wangchuk Arrested for Inciting Mob Violence
However, Mate was rearrested the same day in another case—FIR No. 25(1)/2024, renumbered as RC-06/2024/NIA/IMP—concerning the killing of Havildar Takhellambam Seileshor Singh during a separate exchange of fire at Moreh Town. Challenging the denial of bail in RC-06, Mate argued that the NIA failed to inform either him or the court about this second case during earlier proceedings, making his arrest unlawful.
In its judgment, the High Court pointed out discrepancies in the NIA’s investigation. The arrest memo in RC-05 noted the involvement of Waikhom Rohit, from the Meitei community, in the killings of two Manipur Police Commandos. Yet, the FIRs in RC-05 and RC-06 mentioned the death of only one personnel each. The bench questioned how Mate, a member of the rival Kuki community, could be implicated alongside Rohit amid ongoing ethnic clashes since 2023.
The court also dismissed the NIA’s reliance on mobile messages and Call Detail Records (CDR), stating the evidence did not conclusively link Mate to the gunfight. It further criticized the agency for filing two FIRs over what appeared to be a single incident on January 17, 2024, and for failing to disclose Rohit’s alleged role in the FIRs despite citing it in Mate’s arrest memo.
Citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Uday Chand and Others vs. Sk. Mohd. Abdullah (1983), the bench held that the NIA’s non-disclosure of the second case violated established legal principles. It also observed that the NIA Court’s reasoning for rejecting bail—based on the broad nature of the FIRs—was inadequate, especially since Mate’s name surfaced only during investigation.
Granting bail, the High Court directed Mate to furnish a bail bond of ₹2,00,000 with one surety of the same amount, cooperate with investigators when summoned, and refrain from influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence. The June 25 order was set aside, clearing the way for Mate’s release pending further investigation.
The ruling underscores the judiciary’s insistence on procedural fairness and robust evidence in cases under the UAPA, while also spotlighting contradictions in the NIA’s handling of sensitive cases amid Manipur’s volatile ethnic conflict.
