New Delhi: The Supreme Court Tuesday restrained Manipur Police from taking coercive action against a Delhi-based woman lawyer who has been reportedly accused by police of waging a war against the state, among other things. The charges came on the back of a “fact-finding” visit she made to the state that’s been hit by ethnic violence since May.
The Delhi-based lawyer, Deeksha Dwivedi, had accompanied a two-member “fact-finding team” of the National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW) — the women’s wing of the Communist Party of India — on a four-day visit to Manipur between 28 June and 1 July.
The NFIW had gone to the conflict-hit state to conduct a ground assessment of the situation, particularly with regard to the alleged violence faced by women there.
In her petition filed before the Supreme Court to quash the First Registration Report (FIR) reportedly filed against her, Dwivedi, who was represented by senior advocate Siddhartha Dave, said she learnt about the criminal case against her from online news reports published on 9 July. ThePrint has a copy of the petition.
According to the petition, apart from section 121 (waging a war against the state) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Manipur Police have also invoked Sections 153, 153A, 153B against Dwivedi — all of which relate to promoting enmity through illegal means — as well as Section 124, which punishes assault on the President or Governor with the intention of restraining him/her from exercising any lawful power. Also added are sections 499 and 500, both of which deal with defamation.
Raising legal questions on the action of filing of FIR against, Dwivedi called it “perverse” and said it could have “a chilling effect on all citizens’ action and criticism”.
The charge of waging a war against the state is a grievous one, punishable by either death or life imprisonment and a fine.
Dwivedi said in her petition that according to the media, the FIR was registered at Imphal Police Station on the basis of a complaint filed by a local resident, L. Liben Singh.
She added that she’s still unaware of the full contents of the FIR and had sent an email to Manipur Director General of Police through her lawyer on 10 July for a copy of it. She has yet to receive a copy, Dave told the court.
Hostilities between the non-tribal Meiteis and the tribal Kukis, which first began on 3 May following a ‘Tribal Solidarity March’ taken out to oppose the demand for inclusion of Meiteis in the Scheduled Tribe (ST) category — and for what was described as an effort to secure the rights and constitutional safeguards of the ethnic Kuki and their sub-tribes — has left an estimated 150 plus dead and displaced more than 50,000 people.
The three women — including NFIW general secretary Annie Raja, and national secretary Nisha Sidhu — all of who are reportedly named in the FIR, had allegedly labelled the current situation in Manipur as “state-sponsored violence”.
According to media reports, organisations like the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) and the All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) have condemned the FIR against the women, asking Manipur’s N. Biren Singh government to “stop criminalising human rights work”.
Also Read:‘Hindu ki Dukan’, ‘Meitei Clinic’: Fearing mobs, Imphal shopkeepers state ethnicity using posters
‘No overt or implicit act’
After Dwivedi’s petition was mentioned, a bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who was in court for another case, to convey to the Manipur Police that no coercive steps should be taken against the lawyer.
The SC directive came after Dwivedi’s lawyer, Dave, told the court that although the Delhi lawyer had joined the team on its visit, she didn’t sign its report.
“She is a member of this bar and has four years of experience,” the bench told Mehta, who, on his part, took strong objection to Dave’s statement that it was difficult to go to Manipur to fight the case. Mehta said he would communicate the court’s decision to the Manipur authorities.
Dwivedi has claimed in her petition that the NFIW had asked to her to be a part of the visit as an independent lawyer, to answer legal queries of people in Manipur.
According to the petition, before the visit, the team held multiple meetings in Delhi with women from Manipur who have been allegedly displaced by the violence. Giving details about the four-day visit to the state, Dwivedi’s petition said the team spoke to officers and to women and children who have taken shelter in makeshift relief camps.
Meetings were also held with the district collector of Churachandpur district and assistant collector of Bishnupur district — both in Manipur — to recommend improvements to relief camps, the petition said.
But, the petition said, it appeared from the news reports that the FIR has accused the team and her of being critical of the state’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government.
On the sections invoked, Dwivedi said in the petition that the provision related to “waging a war” carries “extraordinary penalties” and ought not to be used against an independent observer such as her. Regarding Section 124 of the IPC, she said, there was no overt or implicit act that could be attributed to her to believe that she could have committed the alleged offence.
(Edited by Uttara Ramaswamy)
Also Read: ‘Don’t want court to be used as platform to escalate violence in Manipur’, says Supreme Court