Manipur High Court revokes inclusion order for Meitei community in ST List
Imphal, Feb 22: The Manipur High Court has ordered deletion of a paragraph from a March 2023 order that urged the state to consider including the Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribe list saying the paragraph was in conflict with the Supreme Court's constitution bench stance.
The March 27, 2023 directive, believed to be a catalyst for ethnic unrest that claimed over 200 lives, was rescinded by a single judge bench of Justice Golmei Gaiphulshillu during a review petition hearing on Wednesday.
The contentious paragraph from last year's verdict, instructing the state to expedite consideration of Meitei community inclusion, was deemed for deletion.
The paragraph of the last year verdict stated the state government "shall consider the case of the petitioners for inclusion of Meetei/Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribes list, expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks" from the date of receipt of the order.
Justice Gaiphulshillu's ruling on February 21 emphasised the necessity of removing the directive, pointing to the Government of India's stipulated procedure for Scheduled Tribe list amendments.
Justice Gaiphulshillu said, "Accordingly, the direction given at para no. 17(iii) needs to be deleted and is ordered accordingly for deletion of the para no. 17(iii) of the judgment and order dated March 27, 2023...".
Referring to the constitutional protocol detailed in the Ministry of Tribal Affairs' 2013-14 report, the court highlighted the need for alignment with the Supreme Court's constitutional interpretation.
"...I am satisfied and of the view that the direction given at Para no. 17(iii) of the single judge dated March 27, 2023...which is impugned herein needs to be reviewed, as the direction given at para no. 17(iii) of the single judge is against the observation made in the constitution bench of the Supreme Court," the high court said in its 19-page verdict.
The high court's detailed 19-page verdict underlined the legislative limitations on judicial interference concerning Scheduled Tribe classifications, as outlined by a constitution bench ruling in November 2000.
"Courts cannot and should not expand jurisdiction to deal with the question as to whether a particular caste, sub-caste; a group or part of tribe or sub-tribe is included in any one of the Entries mentioned in the Presidential Orders issued under Article 341 and 342 particularly so when in Clause (2) of the said Article, it is expressly stated that said orders cannot be amended or varied except by law made by Parliament" the verdict of Supreme Court's Constitution bench in November 2000 said.
The constitution bench had elucidated that courts should not overstep their jurisdiction in determining such categorisations.
Following the eruption of violence post the March 27 order, a series of petitions, including challenges to the high court directive, were presented to the Supreme Court.
The apex court, on May 17 of the same year, denounced the high court's directive as "obnoxious" and considered staying the order due to its perceived inaccuracies.
A bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud had said, "I will tell you (lawyers) one thing that the high court order was incorrect... I think we have to stay the order of the high court. The high court order is absolutely wrong."
The apex court bench had made clear it will not deal with legal issues arising out of the Manipur High Court's decision on grant of reservation to majority Meiteis as the pleas challenging the order were pending with the larger division bench there.
Amid the legal discourse, the Supreme Court refrained from addressing the core legal aspects arising from the Manipur High Court's decision, as the challenges were pending before a larger division bench.
The court invited tribal participation, particularly from Kukis, in the ongoing legal proceedings related to the intra-court appeals.
The violent unrest in Manipur, triggered by dissent over Meitei community's Scheduled Tribe status aspiration, underscores the complex demographic fabric of the region.
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.
Kerala court sentences man to life imprisonment for doc's murder in hospital
_vb_42.jpeg)
Kollam (PTI): A teacher convicted in the sensational murder of Dr Vandana Das inside a hospital here was sentenced to life term on Saturday, and the prosecution said it will move an appeal seeking death penalty for the accused. The victim's family also batted for "maximum punishment".
Dr Das was brutally killed inside a taluk hospital in May 2023 by G Sandeep.
Kollam Additional District and Sessions judge P N Vinod sentenced Sandeep to a total of 30 years for various offences under the then Indian Penal Code (IPC) and said that after he serves that period, his life imprisonment for Das' murder will commence.
The court also imposed a fine of Rs 2.35 lakh on the convict.
Though the prosecution had sought death penalty for the accused during the arguments on sentence, the court was of the view that the case does not fall under the rarest-of-rare category to warrant the maximum punishment.
It was also of the view that there was a chance of the convict getting reformed as he told the court that the rest of his life would be one of repentance, the order on sentence said.
"At the same time, I agree with the stand of the prosecution to the effect that the sentence should commensurate with the gravity of the crime and the sentence should not only be reformative, but should also have a deterrent effect."
"In my view, the said objective can be achieved by directing that the term sentences that will be imposed will run consecutively and life sentence that has to be imposed will commence only after the expiration of terms sentences," the judge said.
After the verdict, special public prosecutor (SPP) Prathap G Padickal told reporters outside the court that he will recommend to the prosecution to file an appeal seeking enhancement of the life imprisonment to death penalty.
The victim's father said that the verdict has come as a relief for the family, but that he cannot authoritatively say whether his late daughter has got justice. He indicated his dissatisfaction with the punishment, saying that steps will be taken to seek its enhancement after discussions with the public prosecutor.
Dr Das' mother said that the family can only wish for the maximum punishment and it was up to the court to decide what sentence should be given. She said that the family will go in appeal, but declined to comment on whether her daughter got justice.
She tearfully said that she wants the convict to suffer the same pain that her daughter underwent "as he stabbed her 27 times".
The court on March 17 had convicted Sandeep for various offences under the IPC, including murder, destruction of evidence and wrongful restraint.
It had also held him guilty under the provisions of the Kerala Healthcare Service Persons and Healthcare Service Institutions (Prevention of violence and damage to property) Act 2012.
Sandeep was brought to the taluk hospital by the police for medical treatment during the small hours of May 10, 2023 and he went on a sudden attacking spree using a pair of surgical scissors kept in the room where his leg injury was being dressed.
A school teacher by profession, he had initially attacked the police officers and another person who had accompanied him to the hospital and then turned on the young Dr Das, who could not escape to safety.
She was stabbed several times and later succumbed to her injuries in a private hospital in Thiruvananthapuram where she was rushed following the attack.
Dr Das was a native of the Kaduthuruthy area of Kottayam district and the only child of her parents.
She was a house surgeon at Azeezia Medical College Hospital and was working at the Kottarakkara taluk hospital as part of her training.
Sandeep had called the emergency number 112, claiming that his life was in danger. When local police located him, he was standing close by his home, surrounded by local residents and his relatives, and had a wound on his leg following an alleged quarrel.
He was then taken to the hospital for dressing the wound.
_vb_97.jpeg)
_vb_62.jpeg)