Supreme Court questions delay in legal aid for Manipur violence victims

Today, the Supreme Court questioned the delay in implementing its directions on providing legal aid to victims of the Manipur violence, noting that little had been done since its 26 February order. A Bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant was hearing a batch of petitions concerning investigation and trial in cases arising from the ethnic violence in the state.

The 26 February order had directed the Manipur and Assam State Legal Services Authorities to provide one legal aid counsel to each victim or their family, particularly those who were conversant in the local languages. The CJI expressed his dissatisfaction on the delay after the Court was informed that the two authorities were still coordinating to shortlist counsel.“It has been a month since our orders were passed. Nothing complied with,” he said. The Advocate General for Manipur assured the Court that legal aid counsel would be made available immediately.

Trials dragging, missing chargesheets 

Senior Advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the accused persons were not appearing before trial courts and the proceedings were moving slowly. Further, she claimed that chargesheets had not been supplied to victims’ families.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati denied the allegation and stated that chargesheets had been supplied to victims. Recording this statement, the Court observed that once legal aid counsel are appointed, they must obtain copies of the chargesheets to assist victims effectively.  The Court directed presiding officers of trial courts to verify whether chargesheets have been supplied and to record this in their orders.

In its earlier order, the Court had noted that trials were being conducted in Guwahati while many victims remained in Manipur, making access to proceedings difficult without legal assistance and documents.

Too many cooks 

Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves argued that the reports prepared by the Supreme Court appointed committee led by Justice Gita Mittal had not been shared. He claimed that there was no visible progress on several complaints placed before authorities. Attorney General R. Venkatramani responded that complaints could be forwarded to him. 

During the exchange, Chief Justice Surya Kant noted that several authorities were involved, including the CBI, SITs, the Justice Mittal Committee and the oversight by former DGP Dattatray Padsalgikar. Notably, the oversight mechanism—the Justice Mittal Committee and the Padsalgikar committee was set up in August 2023 by a Bench led by former CJI D.Y. Chandrachud. The former was to oversee the humanitarian aspects of the Manipur violence and the latter was tasked with supervising the investigations led by the CBI. CJI Surya Kant remarked that having multiple bodies was only adding to the problem.

The Bench noted the need to strengthen institutional responses within the state. Justice Bagchi observed that there was a need to “revitalise institutions in the state of Manipur.”  While the Attorney General cautioned that the situation was “politically complicated,” the Court indicated that issues such as rehabilitation and rebuilding could not be deferred on that ground.

The Court directed that status reports be filed by the committees, particularly on complaints received and action taken, before it considers the next steps.