Supreme Court raps Manipur govt over delay in FIR in Manipur viral video case
First Published: 31st July, 2023 17:27 IST
The court asked the centre how many, out of around 6,000 FIRs, are for crimes against women
The Supreme Court today pulled up the Centre and Manipur governments on the horrific viral video incident in the state where two women were paraded naked on May 4.
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said that one cannot justify what happened in Manipur “by saying that this and this happened elsewhere”.
In response to a lawyer who spoke about crimes against women in Bengal, Rajasthan, and Chhattisgarh, the Chief Justice said that one cannot excuse what’s happening in Manipur on the ground that similar crimes are happening in other parts of the state.
CJI Chandrachud asked ” Question is how do we deal with Manipur. Mention that…Are you saying protect all daughters of India or don’t protect anyone?”
The top court was hearing the centre’s request to transfer the case of two women being paraded naked in strife-torn Manipur to a different state.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who is representing the victims, stated that the government doesn’t have the data to tell how many such cases have been registered, and this shows the state of affairs. Sibal noted that, despite his appeal for a Supreme Court-monitored investigation, the victims do not want a CBI probe or a transfer of the case to Assam.
The government, meanwhile, said it has no objection if the Supreme Court monitors the investigation in the case.
The court also asked the centre how many, out of around 6,000 FIRs, are for crimes against women. The Centre said it doesn’t have a breakdown of such cases for now.
In response, the Supreme Court said, “This is not just one case like Nirbhaya. That is one isolated incident. Here it’s systemic violence perpetrated.”
Senior advocate Sibal also alleged that police were collaborating with the culprits who perpetrated the violence, saying that the women had requested protection from the police but that the officers had instead taken them into the crowd.
Sibal pointed out that while the incident took place on May 4, the Zero FIR was registered on May 18 and Transferred to the concerned police station only in June. The Supreme Court also pulled up the center, asking what they were doing for 14 days.
The Supreme Court also pulled up the center, asking what they were doing for 14 days.
However, according to Solicitor General Tushar, the Center never requested that the matter be transferred to Assam.
Mehta added that the Center had requested transfer to whichever location the court deemed appropriate.
Meanwhile, Senior advocate Indira Jaising argued for a high-powered committee to visit Manipur and record statements of the survivors. She added the SC could decide the future course of action based on that report.
Jaising told Supreme Court that as per the Centre’s status report, 595 FIRs have been registered. How many of these relate to sexual violence, and how many are arson, murder, there is no clarity, Jaising added.
Attorney-General R. Venkataramani then said there were “too many complications”, both political and non-political, and proposed a CBI probe.
Meanwhile, CJI DY Chandrachud observed that the video pertaining to these three women is not the only incident. He said that what happened to the women was not an isolated incident and called for a broader mechanism to take care of violence against women in the north-eastern state.
He then asked the Attorney General how many FIRs have been registered so far pertaining to violence against women.
The two women filed petitions in the Supreme Court against the center and the Manipur government. The petitions request that the Supreme Court take suo motu action on the case and order a fair and impartial inquiry.
The victims have also requested that their identities be protected.
The two women have been referred to as “X” and “Y” in the court documents.
They have sought a probe led by an independent SIT headed by an IG-rank police officer and the transfer of the trial outside the state.
Stating that they have no faith in the state police, they have also sought security for themselves and a direction for the recording of their statement under Section 164 of the CrPC by the nearest area magistrate. This comes at a time when the center has already transferred the case to the CBI.
The Supreme Court, meanwhile, has posted the matter to be heard at 2 pm tomorrow.
Also Read: Manipur unrest: Supreme Court to hear pleas of Centre and victims of May 4 sexual assault today
COMMENTS
TOPMOST STORY NOW
Live India secures repatriation of 283 nationals from Myanmar lured on pretext of fake jobs
11th March 2025
Live Tripura: DYFI, TYF Accuse BJP of Institutionalising Corruption Over 7 Years
11th March 2025
Live Hahim Village’s Plea Finally Heard: Kamrup DC Assures Action to Long-Pending Issues
11th March 2025
Live Meghalaya Govt Urges Centre to Declare Traditional Stone and Sand Mining as Non-Mining Activity
11th March 2025
WE RECOMMEND
Manipur’s RS MP Maharaja Sanajaoba Leishemba Calls for Reclaiming Kabaw Valley in Rajya Sabha
After Manipur merged with India in 1949, the payment continued to the Indian government until around 1953.
10th March 2025
Manipur Unrest: 1 Protestor Killed, Over 40 Injured During Clashes With Security Forces In Kangpokpi District
The MST bus was initially blocked at Gamgiphai but security personnel managed to ensure that the bus crossed Gamgiphai. However
08th March 2025
Manipur Resumes Intra-State Bus Service Amid Crisis with CAPF Escort
This decisive action follows a high-level meeting chaired by Amit Shah on March 1, when he directed officials to restore free movement.
08th March 2025
Manipur to Resume Bus Services Amidst Opposition, CAPF to Escort Vehicles
The Chief Secretary’s office has issued a stern warning against any attempts to disrupt the newly resumed transportation services.
08th March 2025
Manipur’s Shangshak to Get 2-Lane Road to Tengnoupal After 50 Years, Villagers Warn Against Poor Construction Quality
However, villagers from 25 villages along the route have issued a strong warning against companies bidding below the estimated project cost.
07th March 2025