The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to direct the army and paramilitary forces to provide security in tribal areas in Manipur, saying that the apex court, in its 72 years of existence, has never issued directions to the Army on how to conduct military, security, or rescue operations.
A bench, headed by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and comprising Justices P.S. Narasimha and Manoj Misra said that the greatest hallmark of democracy was civilian control over the army and hence, it could not breach that.
It stressed that the maintenance of law and order and the preservation of the security of the state are the responsibilities of the elected government, and it would be inappropriate for the court to issue directives to the army or paramilitary forces, as this would interfere with the government’s ability to govern.
The court directed the state and Central governments to ensure the protection of life and liberty of citizens in Manipur.
The top court was hearing a series of petitions filed regarding the recent outbreak of violence in Manipur. The state government had submitted a status report last week, outlining the measures it had taken to contain the violence.
One of the pleas, filed by Manipur Tribal Forum alleged that the Central government’s assurances to the top court with regard to its handling of the issue were false. The Forum was among the parties one of the organisations that had filed a petition with the Supreme Court, asking the Central and State governments to evacuate Manipuri tribals who had fled to CRPF camps and to ensure that they returned to their homes safely under police protection.
On July 3, the Supreme Court had called for an updated status report from the state of Manipur amid the state’s government claim that the situation was improving in the northeastern state after clashes broke out between the Kuki and Meitei communities.
“The situation is improving but slowly. CAPF companies have been deployed. The curfew has been reduced to 5 hours. There is an improvement,” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had informed the court. On the contrary, senior advocate Colin Gonsalves had argued that several militant group leaders were openly threatening to annihilate the Kukis.
He said that on the previous night, three Kukis were killed, including the beheading of a tribal man. Mehta, representing the state government, had opposed Gonsalves’s claims and said that “communal angle” should not be given and added that “real human beings are being dealt with”.
