Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Hindu
The Hindu
National
Krishnadas Rajagopal

Do not intend to run Manipur administration; we can scrap Gita Mittal Committee or you can trust it, CJI tells petitioners

Faced with myriad complaints and grievances from petitioners in the Manipur ethnic violence case, the Supreme Court on September 25 said it could not run the State administration, and petitioners had to trust the Justice Gita Mittal Committee to do its job.

“Either we scrap the committee and hear the matter or you [petitioners] trust the committee ... We do not intend to run the Manipur administration… You allow the process to work out,” Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud addressed the petitioners during an extended hearing which spanned over an hour.

The issues raised by various petitioners, and to begin with, the committee itself, included distribution of Aadhaar cards and disability certificates to the displaced people of the State, to distribution of compensation to the families of the dead, reconstruction of religious buildings and homes destroyed in the clashes, disposal of bodies to functioning of courts in the State.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, seeing the Justice Gita Mittal Committee before the court, said all the panel had to do was make a “telephone call to the Manipur Chief Secretary to resolve immediate problems”.

The Justice Mittal Committee was constituted by the apex court to intervene and monitor relief and rehabilitation, restoration of homesteads, religious places of worship, etc, in Manipur. Chief Justice Chandrachud had said the committee, through its work, would endeavour to re-instill the Manipur people’s belief in the rule of law.

As for the petitioners, the court seemed to agree with the State government’s logic that complaints should be first brought to the committee for a resolution.

However, at one point, when complaints of overzealousness against the petitioners reached a pitch and threatened to devolve into a slanging match, the Chief Justice intervened to point out that “giving a hearing is part of the healing process, we know where to draw the line too”.

The Bench directed the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to provide Aadhaar cards to persons who have been displaced during the violence, provided their records were already with the authority. As for others, the court ordered that the necessary verification prior to issuance of Aadhaar cards should be conducted expeditiously.

Disability certificates

Similarly, the apex court ordered the State to issue duplicates of disability certificates, especially to people in relief camps. The State Finance department has been directed to issue appropriate orders to banks to facilitate the displaced to access their accounts.

The court ordered the Manipur government to release adequate funds to local authorities, district-wise, for distribution of compensation to the violence-affected families.

During the hearing, the court misheard that “60%” of the families of the dead victims have been compensated.

“Not 60%, 60 ‘persons’… a tiny amount,” senior advocate Colin Gonsalves corrected.

The court ordered the State to appoint a nodal officer in Delhi to guide people who had fled Manipur during the violence. The officer would help victims file complaints and petitions with the appropriate authorities in the State.

When asked about the disposal of bodies in the morgue, Mr. Mehta plainly said that the “State was taking steps”.

The Bench even asked for 100 sample orders recently passed by the Manipur High Court to verify claims by petitioners that lawyers belonging to a certain community were prevented from attending court. “Our conscience has to be satisfied,” Chief Justice Chandrachud replied when Mr. Mehta said the allegation was “false”.

The court directed video-conferencing facilities to be installed in district courts across Manipur within a week, warning the State that any violation of the direction would attract contempt proceedings in the Supreme Court.

The court, however, did not, for now, agree with a request made by the petitioners to share the State government’s status report on missing and stolen weapons with the Justice Mittal Committee. Mr. Mehta said the confidential report was meant only for the court’s eyes. Chief Justice Chandrachud said the court would have to first go through the report.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.