New Delhi (Agency): In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has taken a proactive stance in addressing the ongoing issue of illegal arms recovery in Manipur, a state marked by ethnic violence. The court has directed both the Manipur government and law enforcement agencies to submit a status report detailing the progress in recovering arms from all sources within the state.
The bench responsible for this directive includes Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra. It has also acknowledged an affidavit submitted by the Manipur chief secretary, which refutes claims of a shortage of basic commodities like food and medicines for people affected by economic blockades. Additionally, the affidavit denies allegations of outbreaks of diseases like chickenpox and measles in relief camps, as asserted by lawyers representing petitioners.
The Chief Secretary’s affidavit provided information on the availability of essential commodities, including food and medicines, particularly in Moreh, a town near the border. It also outlined steps taken to distribute rations in nine relief camps. The court emphasized that if any specific grievances persist regarding these issues, they should be promptly brought to the attention of the district administration for expedient resolution.
Regarding the recovery of illegal arms, the Supreme Court ordered that a status report be furnished by the government. Importantly, the court specified that this report should be made available exclusively to the court itself, underlining the sensitivity and confidentiality of this matter.
In addition to these directives, the bench issued several other instructions. It directed the Union home secretary to communicate with Justice (retd) Gita Mittal, the chairperson of a three-member panel appointed by the apex court to oversee relief and rehabilitation work in Manipur. This communication is intended to finalize the selection of experts who will assist the committee in its tasks.
Furthermore, the state government has been directed to nominate an officer with whom the committee can interact to facilitate its work effectively. The court has also requested a status report from the Manipur government, outlining the steps taken to upgrade the state’s victim compensation scheme to align it with the NALSA (National Legal Services Authority) scheme.
Addressing a reference made in the chief secretary’s affidavit regarding the lawyers appearing in the case, the court clarified that any reference to counsel should not be construed as a comment on the counsel’s conduct. The court reiterated that lawyers appearing before the court serve as officers of the court and are accountable to it.
Moreover, the state government has been instructed to provide a status report regarding the establishment of a portal for the committee overseeing relief and rehabilitation work.
The issue of unclaimed bodies in morgues was also raised, with concerns about their proper disposal to prevent the spread of diseases. The court emphasized that these bodies cannot remain in morgues indefinitely and called upon the government to make decisions regarding their dignified disposal.
This development comes after the Supreme Court’s earlier directive, issued on September 1, which called on the Central and state governments to ensure the uninterrupted supply of basic commodities such as food and medicines to areas facing economic blockades in Manipur.
