Manipur Violence | Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain PIL To Set Up Commission To Resolve Differences Between Ethnic Groups

The Supreme Court on Monday (December 11) refused to entertain a Writ Petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking directions to constitute a commission of enquiry to aid in resolving the differences between the three ethnic communities of the State of Manipur, namely the Nagas, Meiteis and Kukis.

The bench comprising the CJI, D.Y. Chandrachud and Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing a PIL filed by three petitioners - a victim, a public-spirited citizen and a law student.

The bench found the reliefs sought in the petition to be “ too vague”.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, for the petitioners, stressed the need for a resolution and for striving truce between the conflict-struck communities, he expressed “ My lords the reason is this- we have to take a step back and take a look at the fact this Court, unfortunately, or fortunately is the one institution everybody is looking towards in situations like this…..You have done in the past which is why I am saying, a commission of enquiry which sits and just maybe a former judge of this court to get these communities together at a table…because this is continuing my lords…. You're going to have representatives of various communities at each other's throats some accusing the Govt. Of India, others accusing the Govt. of Nagaland, nobody is attempting to ensure that there is some truce.”

The Court essentially raised its reservations on the aspect of the ambit of such commissions, if constituted. The CJI remarked that such matters perhaps require “a resolution by the Political Executives” and that there are several complexities for the Judiciary first to constitute a committee and then implement its report.

The senior advocate was quick to highlight the specificity of a “commission” and not a “committee” as their prayer, adding further that “the mandate of such a commission is limited, it's not to enforce anything.”. The counsel also pointed out that so far no joint meeting has taken place between the representatives of these communities.

Referring to the 3-member committee headed by Justice Gita Mittal set up by the order of the Apex Court on August 7, 2023, to examine the nature of violence against women and report on measures required for rehabilitation, emotional, economic, social and psychological support of the victims of sexual violence that occurred since May 4, 2023, in the state of Manipur, the CJI observed, “If you want, You can go to Justice Gita Mittal(committee) with a specific issue on what can happen and what can be done if she says I don't have a remit then come back to us”.

Contending that the Mittal Committee has a different mandate from the present remedy sought, the Senior Advocate emphasized the ongoing ethnic clash between the state communities, he stated that “ The Nagas and the Kuki are in the hills. Their numbers are small but their territories are much larger. That's one of the major issues that is affecting them. The Meities are in the valley they are larger in number but have smaller land area coverage. This and multiple issues are listed.”

The bench concluded that if there are any specific grievances, they can be brought to the attention of the Committee headed by Justice Mittal. The bench gave liberty to the Petitioners to seek other steps as available in law.

In doing so, the CJI remarked, “Unless there's a clear way forward that we envisage that our intervention will lead to a certain situational change in the ground, otherwise what happens is you know, expectations are aroused, that well you know the Court is not doing something. It is going to divert the attention, it is the responsibility of the executive to do this….Us taking on a road in which we can never do, we have no means to ensure performance on the ground only affects our legitimacy”

Case details: YUMLEMBAM SURJIT SINGH vs. UNION OF INDIA, W.P.(C) No. 001341 - / 2023