Breaking| This Platform Should Not Be Used For Spreading Misinformation: SC Seeks Constructive Suggestions In Pleas On Manipur Violence

A bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, and Justice PS Narasimha said in the order that parties have been permitted to make concrete suggestions, which can be taken due note of by the Union and the State. "We do not want these proceedings to be used for further escalation of violence and other problems that already exist in the state. We are not running the security or law enforcement apparatus. This platform should not be used for spreading misinformation", the CJI said when Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves insisted that he wants to make submissions.

"This is not a political platform. We can't run the law and situation on the ground, then what is the elected governments for", the CJI said interrupting Colin Gonsalves.

"There is an enormous responsibility on the Counsel who are appearing in the matter", said Justice Narasimha when a lawyer submitted that Colin Gonsalves is giving interviews to media.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted at the outset that a status report has been filed and read from the report. It said that things are returning to normalcy anything said in Court could have repercussions.

The Court then took time to read the whole report. CJI Chandrachud then asked Colin Gonsalves to give concrete suggestions on the report so that the Court can direct the authorities to consider those. We can be facilitators, the Court said. Come with a note tomorrow morning. Give us specific suggestions, the CJI added.

Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves submitted that from the middle of May, the Centre has been saying the same thing. I am very sceptical, he said.

"Your scepticism cant lead us to take over the law and order machinery, nor can we ask the High Court to do that. This is essentially the function of the High Court and the state", the CJI told Gonsalves.

On behalf of the High Court Bar Association, it was submitted that 10 kms of National High Way 2 is captured and blocked and that the authorities should free the High Way. The Court asked the Solicitor General to look into the same. The CJI then asked the SG about the weapons taken away from the Police Station.

Background

The Court on May 8, 2023 while adjourning the SLP had directed measures to be taken for humanitarian care. The Court noted the submissions of the Solicitor General on the adequate steps being taken to curb violence and directed that the matter be listed for May 17, 2023, and asked for an updated status report to be placed before them.

“While expressing the concern of the court over the loss of human life and destruction of homesteads and places of worships, we emphasise the need for: (i) Ensuring that due arrangements are made in the relief camps by providing all basic amenities in terms of food and medical care; (ii) Taking all necessary precautions for the rehabilitation of displaced persons; and (ii) Protecting places of religious worship”, the bench had noted in its order.

Through an order dated July 3, 2023, the Court noted the Solicitor General’s submissions that the State of Manipur would file an updated status report setting out the measures which have been taken and indicating the present position.

The SLP filed by Dinganglung Gangmei, a BJP leader and the Chairman of the Hill Area Committee challenges the order passed by the Manipur High Court which had directed the State Government to submit a recommendation for the inclusion of the Meeteis/Meiteis in the Scheduled Tribe list to the central government.

The BJP MLA submits that the High Court had no role to play in a political situation which had to be resolved politically and that the High Court ambiguously and in all probability inadvertently gave rise to strong misgivings and worries and tensions among the tribals. It is also contended in the SLP that knowing the tenuous situation in the State, the High Court ought not to have made the order passed.

Assailing the order as illegal, the petitioner states that "there has been long-standing tension between the Meeteis/Meiteis who are dominant and advanced and economically and politically and educationally advanced, and the tribals. The tribals have been correctly included in the Presidential Order as Scheduled Tribes".

Further, challenging the contempt petition initiated by the Manipur High Court on the resolution passed by the petitioner criticizing the impugned order, Gangmei states that initiating contempt is certainly not the way forward and that the resolution of the HAC is neither contemptuous nor disrespects the High Court order and that is protected under Article 19: Freedom of speech.

The High Court had noted that “No satisfactory explanation is forthcoming from the side of the respondent State for not submitting the recommendation for the last 10 years. Therefore, it would be appropriate to direct the respondent State to submit its recommendation to the Ministry of Tribal Affairs within a reasonable time.”

Cause Title: Dinganglung Gangmei v. Shri Mutum Churamani Meetei & Ors.