The plea claims that rocket launchers were fired at unarmed protestors, leaving several women with serious injuries, and calls for a Special Investigation Team probe.
BY PC Bureau
September 23 — The Manipur High Court has asked both the Union and State governments to file their responses to a petition seeking compensation for Kuki women protestors who were allegedly injured in a security forces’ action during an agitation last year. The case, titled Kuki Women Organisation for Human Rights Trust v State of Manipur and 8 Ors, raises serious allegations of excessive force by security personnel.
The petition, filed by the Kuki Women Organisation for Human Rights Trust, alleges that during a protest in Saibol village, unarmed Kuki women demonstrators were met with disproportionate violence, including the reported use of rocket launchers by security forces. The protest had been part of the larger ethnic unrest that engulfed Manipur in May 2023, when longstanding tensions between the Kuki-Zo tribal community and the Meitei majority escalated into widespread violence, displacing thousands and causing severe humanitarian crises across the State.
The petitioners argued that the use of heavy weaponry against civilian protestors not only inflicted grievous injuries but also violated fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. They sought compensation for the victims as well as registration of a criminal case and a probe by a Special Investigation Team (SIT).
READ: Major Healthcare Crisis Looms in Manipur as Doctors Decide to Intensify Stir
Hearing the matter, Justice A Guneshwar Sharma stopped short of issuing a formal notice on the SIT demand but allowed the respondents to file their versions.
“Official respondents are permitted to file counter affidavit within three weeks and rejoinder affidavit, if any, within two weeks,” the Court said while fixing October 17 as the next date of hearing.
Contentious Issue of Personal Liability
Significantly, the plea impleaded certain officers of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) in their personal capacity as respondents, holding them accountable for the alleged firing. This move was strongly opposed by Manipur Advocate General Lenin Hijam, who cautioned that such notices could adversely affect the morale of security forces operating in volatile conditions.
Echoing this view, Central government counsel BR Sharma submitted that only official respondents should be made to contest the proceedings. Senior Advocate Anand Grover, appearing for the petitioners, conceded that the Court could pass an appropriate order in this regard. The Court, considering these submissions, deferred issuing notice to the CRPF personnel named individually as respondents 7 to 9.
The petitioners were represented by Triumvir Law, with a team led by Senior Advocate Anand Grover and comprising Ajay Kumar, Anubhab Sarkar, and Arjun Krishnan, assisted by Chungnaimei Gonmei and Kamei Lungchuithailiu from the chambers of Advocate Worthing Soro.
The State government was represented by Advocate General Lenin Hijam with advocate S Niranjan, while the CRPF was represented by Advocate BR Sharma.
READ: The Wire Case: SC Signals Move to Decriminalize Defamation
The petition reflects ongoing concerns about the conduct of security forces during the ethnic violence that has plagued Manipur since May 2023, leaving over 200 dead and displacing nearly 70,000 people. Civil society groups, particularly from the Kuki-Zo community, have repeatedly alleged bias and disproportionate use of force against their members, while the State maintains that security operations were necessary to maintain law and order in a deeply fractured environment.
The High Court’s decision to seek responses without immediately granting all prayers indicates a cautious approach, balancing the demand for accountability with concerns over the morale of security personnel engaged in counter-insurgency and law enforcement operations in the troubled State.
