Govt bans 9 Meitei extremist groups, their associate organisations
New Delhi, Nov 13: The government on Monday banned nine Meitei extremist groups and their associate organisations, which mostly operate in Manipur, for their anti-national activities, and launching fatal attacks on security forces.
According to a notification issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the groups that have been banned for five years, are: Peoples' Liberation Army generally known as PLA, and its political wing Revolutionary Peoples' Front (RPF), the United National Liberation Front (UNLF) and its armed wing Manipur Peoples' Army (MPA).
The Peoples' Revolutionary Party of Kangleipak (PREPAK) and its armed wing Red Army, the Kangleipak Communist Party (KCP) and its armed wing (also called the Red Army), the Kanglei Yaol Kanba Lup (KYKL), the Coordination Committee (CorCom) and the Alliance for Socialist Unity Kangleipak (ASUK) have also been banned.
The PLA, UNLF, PREPAK, KCP, KYKL were banned by the MHA under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (37 of 1967) years ago and the latest action extends the ban by five years. The declaration as outlawed of the other organisations is fresh.
In its notification, the MHA said the Meitei extremist organisations have declared, as their professed aim, establishment of an independent nation by secession of Manipur from India through armed struggle and to incite indigenous people of Manipur for such secession.
The MHA said it is of the opinion that the Meitei extremist organisations have been engaging in activities prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of India, employing and engaging in armed means to achieve their aforesaid objectives, attacking and killing the security forces, the police and civilians in Manipur, indulging in acts of intimidation, extortion and looting of civilian population for collection of funds for their organisations.
They are making contacts with sources abroad for influencing public opinion and for securing their assistance by way of arms and training for the purpose of achieving their secessionist objective and maintaining camps in neighbouring countries for the purpose of sanctuaries, training and clandestine procurement of arms and ammunition, it said.
The MHA said if there is no immediate curb and control of the Meitei extremist organisations they will take the opportunity to mobilise their cadres for escalating their secessionist, subversive, terrorist and violent activities.
The groups will propagate anti-national activities in collusion with forces inimical to sovereignty and integrity of India, indulge in killings of civilians and targeting of the police and security force personnel, procure and induct illegal arms and ammunition from across the international border and extort and collect huge funds from public for their unlawful activities, the ministry said.
The activities of the Meitei extremist organisations are considered detrimental to the sovereignty and integrity of India and that they are unlawful associations, it said.
"The central government, having regard to the circumstances, is further of opinion that it is necessary to declare the Meitei extremist organisations... as 'unlawful associations' and accordingly, in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to sub-section (3) of section 3 of the said Act, the central government hereby directs that this notification shall, subject to any order that may be made under section 4 of the said Act, have effect from the 13th day of November, 2023, for a period of five years," it said.
Manipur has seen bouts of violence since ethnic clashes first erupted in May. More than 180 people have been killed since then.
The clashes have occurred over a number of grievances that ethnic Meitei and Kuki communities have against the other. A major flashpoint has been a move to give the Meiteis the Scheduled Tribe status, which has since been rolled back.
Meiteis account for about 53 per cent of Manipur's population and live mostly in the Imphal Valley, while tribals, which include Nagas and Kukis, constitute 40 per cent and reside mainly in the hill districts.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Deep societal faultlines persist despite 75 years of independence: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Judge cites denial of home to Muslim girl, opposition to Dalit women cooking mid-day meals
Hyderabad, February 23, 2026: Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has said that despite repeated affirmations of constitutional morality by courts, deep societal faultlines rooted in caste and religious discrimination continue to shape everyday realities in India.
Speaking at a seminar on “Constitutional Morality and the Role of District Judiciary” organised by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy in Hyderabad, Justice Bhuyan reflected on the gap between constitutional ideals and social practices.
He cited a recent instance involving his daughter’s friend, a PhD scholar at a private university in Noida, who was denied accommodation in South Delhi after her surname revealed her Muslim identity. According to Justice Bhuyan, the landlady bluntly informed her that no accommodation was available once her religious background became known.
In another example from Odisha, he referred to resistance by some parents to the government’s mid-day meal programme because the food was prepared by Dalit women employed as cooks. He noted that some parents had objected aggressively and refused to allow their children to consume meals cooked by members of the Scheduled Caste community.
Describing these incidents as “the tip of the iceberg,” Justice Bhuyan said they reveal how far society remains from the benchmark of constitutional morality even 75 years into the Republic. He observed that while the Constitution lays down standards of equality and dignity, the morality practised within homes and communities often diverges sharply from those values.
He emphasised that constitutional morality requires governance through the rule of law rather than the rule of popular opinion. Referring to the evolution of the doctrine through judicial decisions, he cited Naz Foundation v Union of India, in which the Delhi High Court read down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that popular morality cannot restrict fundamental rights under Article 21. Though the judgment was later overturned in Suresh Kumar Koushal v Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court ultimately restored and expanded the principle in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India, affirming that constitutional morality must prevail over majoritarian views.
“In our constitutional scheme, it is the constitutionality of the issue before the court that is relevant, not the dominant or popular view,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also addressed the functioning of the district judiciary, underlining that trial courts are the first point of contact for most litigants and form the foundation of the justice delivery system. He stressed that due importance must be given to the recording of evidence and adjudication of bail matters.
Highlighting the role of High Courts, he said their supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is intended as a shield to correct grave jurisdictional errors, not as a mechanism to substitute the discretion or factual appreciation of trial judges.
He recalled that several distinguished judges, including Justice H R Khanna, Justice A M Ahmadi, and Justice Fathima Beevi, began their careers in the district judiciary.
On representation within the judicial system, Justice Bhuyan noted that Telangana has made significant strides in gender inclusion. Out of a sanctioned strength of 655 judicial officers in the Telangana Judicial Service, 478 are currently serving, of whom 283 are women, exceeding 50 per cent representation. He added that members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, minority communities, and persons with disabilities are also represented in the state’s judiciary.
He observed that greater representation of women, marginalised communities, persons with disabilities, and sexual minorities would help make the judiciary more inclusive and reflective of India’s diversity. “The judiciary must represent all the colours of the rainbow and become a rainbow institution,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also referred to the recent restoration by the Supreme Court of the requirement of a minimum three years of practice at the Bar for entry-level judicial posts. While acknowledging that the requirement ensures practical exposure, he cautioned that its impact on women aspirants, especially those from rural or small-town backgrounds facing social and financial constraints, would need to be carefully observed over time.
Concluding his address, he reiterated that the justice system must strive to bridge the gap between constitutional ideals and lived realities, ensuring that the rule of law remains paramount.
