E-Paper
‘Disturbed’ SC hits out on Manipur FIR delays
The Supreme Court came down hard on the government and police of Manipur for mishandling the case where three women were stripped and allegedly gang-raped.
The Supreme Court came down hard on the government and police of Manipur for mishandling the case where three women were stripped and one allegedly gang-raped on May 4, rued the fact that “violence was going on unabated in the state”, and categorically shut down an argument that sought to widen the court’s hearing to one on crimes against women in other states by pointedly remarking that the question was only of Manipur, where the situation was “unprecedented”.
The court, which said it was “deeply disturbed” by the incident, further mulled over setting up a committee to visit the strife torn state and report back with recommendations to enable it issue further directions relating to investigation, rehabilitation and confidence-building measures.
A bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, said that the violence against women in Manipur during the ethnic clashes assumed an “unprecedented magnitude” and that “systemic acts of violence perpetrated in the course of the sectarian strife” require the court to put in place a mechanism for preventing such incidents in future while “restoring the faith of the communities” in the rule of law and constitutional processes.
Putting the Manipur government in the dock over a delay of 14 days in registering a first information report (FIR) into the May 4 assault of the women by a frenzied mob -- a viral video of which sparked a nationwide outcry -- the court deferred its decision on the Centre’s request to transfer the trial of the case outside Manipur and direct for its conclusion within six months of filing of the charge sheet by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). Instead, it said it would first set up a committee, comprising women judges and domain experts, which can give it a first-hand picture of the situation in Manipur and the urgent orders that need to be passed.
Clashes between the Kukis and Meiteis first erupted on May 3 during a protest against a court-ordered tweak to the state’s reservation matrix, granting scheduled tribe (ST) status to the latter. Violence quickly engulfed the state where ethnic fault lines run deep, displacing tens of thousands of people who fled burning homes and neighbourhoods into jungles, often across state borders. At least 150 people have lost their lives in the violence so far.
The authorities quickly clamped a curfew and suspended internet, pumping in additional security forces to force a break in the spiraling clashes. Internet is still not back in the state. But tensions were simmering for much longer, owing to the state government’s decision to exit the tripartite accord and move against some forest dwelling groups it termed as encroachers.
On June 4, the Union government formed a three-member judicial inquiry panel to probe the ethnic violence in Manipur on the recommendation of the state government.
The bench, which also included justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, was hearing a clutch of pleas relating to the violence in the northeastern state, and one of the fresh petitions taken up by it on Monday was filed by the two women seen in the viral video.
There was a third woman, too, according to the FIR.
The two women sought a probe by a special investigation team (SIT) under the monitoring of the apex court; their affidavits stated that they were handed over to the frantic crowd by the police officers as they tried to flee their village due to the bloodshed.
“The incident came to light on May 4. What were the police doing for 14 days that the FIR was registered only on May 18? There cannot be any justification for not registering a zero FIR? The May 18 FIR did not name any one and it was against some unknown persons. So, what stopped the police from registering an FIR for 14 days? Was this the only such incident of this nature? How many such zero FIRs have bene registered in toto and how many of them involve crime against women?” the court asked solicitor general (SG) Tushar Mehta, seeking his reply on Tuesday at 2pm.
Zero FIRs are lodged by the police when a crime has been reported but the jurisdictional police station remains to be ascertained.
Mehta, representing the Manipur government, said that there were good reasons why the state recommended a CBI probe into the case, adding the state does not have anything to hide but the crime-wise break up of FIRs was not collated yet.
“We are surprised that the Manipur government is even today not in possession of facts. If these facts and the allegations of complicity are even partially true, especially since in this case the victims have said they were virtually handed over to the mob by the police, should we not have a high-powered committee to look into all this?” it asked.
Lamenting that the “violence (in the state) is going on in the state unabated”, the bench observed that a court appointed committee will give confidence to people that the highest court of the land is looking into their grievances.
“This [committee] is not in terms of just trying to figure out what has happened, but we also need to rebuild lives from here on. A lot has been lost but not everything has been lost...Our idea is ultimately that we restore the faith of the community -- in the rule of law and the constitutional processes. That’s the message we need to send,” said the court, adding that it is thinking of constituting a committee of former judges and experts.
Indicating that the order on setting up the committee will be passed on Tuesday, the bench asked the Manipur government to furnish details of approximately 6,000 FIRs registered in the state, which has been overrun by violence since May 3, claiming at least 150 people in the clashes between the Meitei and the Kuki communities.
“We need to know bifurcation of these 6,000 FIRs. How many zero FIRs were registered? How many were forwarded to jurisdictional magistrates and when? What actions were taken on them? How many arrests have been made and the accused are in judicial custody? How many of these FIRs involve sexual violence? What is the position of legal aid to them? In how many of them 164 statements (statements of victims) have been recorded so far? Give us some facts so that we have a fair idea of what has been happening in the state,” it told the SG.
While the SG and attorney general (AG) R Venkataramani, who was requested by the bench to assist it in the matter, highlighted that the case relating to the viral video has been handed over to CBI, senior counsel Kapil Sibal (appearing for the survivors of the May 4 incident), Indira Jaising, Colin Gonsalves, and advocates Shobha Gupta and Vrinda Grover pressed for a court-monitored special investigation team (SIT) instead of a CBI probe.
The bench, however, pointed out that merely entrusting the probe to CBI or SIT will not serve any purpose and that it wants a mechanism where the process of justice must go to every victim.
The A-G submitted that a little more time and application of mind would be appropriate before the court passes any order, assuring the bench that he would personally monitor the CBI probe. But the bench retorted: “Our extent of intervention will depend on what the government has done so far. If we are satisfied that the government has done enough, we may not intervene. But if we think the state hasn’t done enough, we will have to intervene.”
No to whataboutery
During the hearing, advocate Bansuri Swaraj, representing an applicant in the matter, cited the incidents of assaults and similar parading of women in West Bengal as she implored the bench to issue similar directions for the states of West Bengal , Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan and Kerala from where similar incidents of crimes against women have been reported.
Responding, the bench said: “Undoubtedly there are crimes which are taking place against women across the country -- that is our social reality. But here, we are dealing with something which is of unprecedented magnitude, namely crimes and perpetration of violence against women in a situation of communal and sectarian strife.”
It further said that there is no gainsaying the fact that crimes against women are taking place in all parts. “The only answer is this. You cannot excuse what is taking place in one part of the country like Manipur on the grounds that similar crimes are happening in other parts too. The question currently is how we deal with Manipur?” the court said.
Uniform treatment
Senior advocate Jaideep Gupta appeared for two Meitei organisations, submitting he is reserving his arguments for a different day since it is important for the court to address at some point of time the underlying reasons behind the continuing violence between the two communities.
Acknowledging his concerns, the bench assured Gupta that violence perpetrated against any community will be treated on par. “As a court it is our duty to consider who the victims of violence are. We will be even handed about who the perpetrators are and who the victims are. We will also ask the Centre and the state what they are going to do to ensure violence comes to an end,” it added.
The bench further remarked: “We understand that there will be victims from the Meitei community too. It does not happen in a communal strife that only one side is at the receiving end. That one video sparked a national outrage and it was the trigger-point, but we are not going to confine our exercise to one video.”
The top court had on July 20 taken a suo motu cognisance of the horrific video, terming it “deeply disturbing” and “grossest violation of constitutional rights”, as it threatened to step in if the Centre and the state failed to act.
Responding, the Centre, through Union home secretary Ajay Bhalla, submitted its affidavit on July 27 and informed the court that the case pertaining to the viral video of women being stripped and paraded naked has been handed over to CBI. Maintaining that it has “zero-tolerance towards any crimes against women”, the Centre sought a direction from the top court the trial must be time-bound, and should be transferred outside Manipur. The affidavit further said that it has been made mandatory for the police station in-charge to immediately report all such cases to the director general of police (DGP) in Manipur.
The video of a mob parading and assaulting three women after stripping them two months ago in Manipur surfaced on July 19, fanning fresh tension in the state and a nationwide outcry.
According to the FIR filed in the case, one of the three women of a family was gang raped while a mob of 800-1000 men killed her brother and father. The family of five had fled to a forest to escape the armed mob that entered their village and vandalised houses. Police later rescued the family. The mob surrounded the family and took them from police custody, according to the FIR.
