Suo Motu powers of Supreme Court in Manipur Violence

This article is written by Anurag Nandan Rai, B.A.LL.B. (Hons.) III year, University of Allahabad during his internship at LeDroit India

Key Words

1. Suo Motu
2. Supreme Court
3. Fundamental Rights
4. Public Interest Litigation (PIL)
5. Manipur Violence

Abstract

This article explores the exercise of suo motu powers by the Supreme Court of India in response to the  ethnic violence occured in Manipur in 2023. The term suo motu, meaning “on its own”, refers to the Supreme Court’s ability to initiate legal proceedings without a formal petition, especially in matters involving gross violations of fundamental rights or significant public interest. Rooted in Articles 32, 136, and 142 of the Constitution, this judicial power enables the Court to respond proactively to human rights crises and governance failures. The Manipur conflict, arising from tensions between the Meitei and Kuki communities following a High Court directive, escalated into widespread violence, displacement, and sexual assaults. The Supreme Court’s intervention, particularly after the emergence of a disturbing video of sexual violence, included taking suo motu cognizance, criticizing state inaction, and forming a judicial committee for oversight. This case underscores the judiciary’s critical role in upholding constitutional values and ensuring justice in times of systemic breakdown.

Introduction

Suo Motu, a latin word, which means ‘on its own.’ Suo Motu power enables the Supreme Court to take cognizance of any grievous matter and initiate legal proceedings against it. This power is an essential feature of the Indian judiciary’s proactive role in ensuring justice and protecting constitutional rights, especially under Public Interest Litigation (PIL). 

The constitutional provisions provided under Article 32, which provides for enforcement of fundamental rights, Article 136 providing for Special Leave Petition and Article 142 stating that an order passed by Supreme Court is binding on all the lower courts. These provisions empower the Court to act suo motu when there is:

• Gross violation of Fundamental Rights
• Matters of Public Interest
• Urgency in environmental, human rights, or governance failures

What happened in Manipur?

In May, 2023 an ethnic conflict and civil unrest erupted in the north-eastern part of the country, in state of Manipur. This devastating situation arose due to conflict between two communities i.e. Meitei, which resides in the Imphal Valley and forms the majority population, and Kuki, who inhabit the surrounding hill districts and are recognised as Scheduled Tribes.

The Manipur High Courts directed state government to consider the demand and include Meitei community in Scheduled Tribes (STs) list, activated the conflict. This demand was violently opposed by other Scheduled Tribes castes, particularly the Kukis, who feared it would dilute their existing constitutional protections over land, jobs, and political representation. On May 3, 2023 a tribal solidarity march was organized by All Tribal Students’ Union of Manipur (ATSUM) suddenly the demonstrators raged up causing the situation of unrest then began the retaliatory attacks from the other community which worsens the situation.

This ethnic violence marked by mass displacement, arson, killings, sexual violence, and the destruction of property. A particularly disturbing low point was the surfacing of a video showing two Kuki women being paraded naked and sexually assaulted by a mob. The video, which went viral in July 2023, drew national outrage and forced the government and judiciary to act.

Role of Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of India took suo motu cognizance of the matter on July 20, 2023. Then Chief Justice DY Chandrachud strongly condemned the act and demanded a report from both the state and union governments. He also criticized the delayed arrest of offender and called it a serious constitutional failure. the Supreme Court constituted a three-member committee headed by Justice (Retd.) Gita Mittal to oversee the humanitarian response, victim rehabilitation, and ensure that due process was followed. The Court also monitored the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry into the specific incidents of violence, particularly those involving sexual assault and custodial negligence. The Manipur violence has raised urgent questions about the fragility of inter-community relations, constitutional governance, and the role of the state in protecting fundamental rights. It exposed the limitations of administrative mechanisms in dealing with deep-seated ethnic tensions. The prolonged internet shutdowns, censorship allegations, and alleged political indifference have all drawn criticism from human rights organisations.

While the Supreme Court’s intervention has provided a measure of accountability and hope, sustainable peace in Manipur will require political reconciliation, community dialogue, and strong institutional reforms. Justice, rehabilitation, and trust-building remain the biggest challenges in the region’s path to recovery.

Observation of Supreme Court

1. Constitutional Breakdown- The violent situation is referred as a constitutional failure and the failure of state machinery to tackle such serious situation. The delayed arrest of perpetrators is referred as ‘unacceptable’.
2. Violation of Article 21- The Apex Court stated the situation emerged is violation of Right to Life and Personal Liberty of the women. It is the failure of the state to provide protection to its citizens and such heinous acts are shame for a nation.
3. Disturbing Nature of Violence- The incident shown in video is ‘deeply disturbing’ and concerning the incident of displacement, sexual offences and arsons.
4. Responsibility of the State- The Court reminded both the Centre and the Manipur government that it is the state’s primary duty to protect all citizens, especially vulnerable groups, in situations of communal or ethnic conflict.

Directions of the Supreme Court

Key actions taken by Supreme Court

1. Suo Motu Cognizance–
   Then CJI
2.  DY Chandrachud described the act as “deeply disturbing” and directed both the Union and Manipur State Governments to submit status reports. The Court stressed that the delay in arresting the perpetrators reflected a constitutional failure.
3. Monitoring the Investigation–
   The Supreme Court supervised the CBI probe into the incidents of sexual violence and custodial lapses to ensure independent and credible investigation.
4. Constitution of Committee–
   A three-member committee headed by Justice (Retd.) Gita Mittal was appointed to:

• Oversee humanitarian relief and rehabilitation of victims
• Monitor delivery of justice and ensure due process
• Recommend long-term structural reforms for governance in Manipur

5. Safeguarding Fundamental Rights–
   Through its intervention, the Court reaffirmed its role as the guardian of constitutional rights, especially where state machinery fails.
6. Judicial Oversight–
   The Supreme Court maintained continuous oversight of developments, holding the government accountable and directing steps to restore peace, dignity, and justice.

Directions of Supreme Court

Status Reports Ordered-The Union and the state government of Manipur were directed to submit detailed affidavits on the steps taken to arrest the culprits and restoring the status quo.

CBI Investigation Ordered- The Supreme Court directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate specific cases involving sexual assault and custodial negligence. It emphasized that investigations must be independent, impartial, and time-bound.

Victim Protection and Rehabilitation- The Apex Court directed the state to provide adequate security and relief to survivors and displaced persons. The Court emphasized the importance of a victim-centric approach.

Constitution of Oversight Committee- Appointed a three-member committee headed by Justice (Retd.) Gita Mittal, along with two other retired women judges:

• To monitor relief and rehabilitation efforts
• To suggest long-term measures for governance, accountability, and rebuilding trust
• To oversee the progress of investigations and ensure fairness

Regular Monitoring- The Apex Court kept the matter under continuous judicial supervision, asking for periodic updates and holding further hearings to ensure compliance.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s exercise of suo motu powers during the 2023 Manipur violence reflects the judiciary’s vital role in safeguarding constitutional rights and ensuring justice when other state institutions fail. By taking cognizance of the horrific human rights violations and the state’s delayed response, the Court reaffirmed its commitment to the protection of fundamental rights under Article 21 and the principles of justice and equality. The constitution of a judicial oversight committee, directions for impartial investigation by the CBI, and insistence on victim-centric rehabilitation reflect a multidimensional judicial intervention. However, the Court’s involvement also highlights the fragile state of governance and the pressing need for administrative, political, and societal reforms in conflict-prone regions. While judicial action has offered a measure of accountability and hope, the path to lasting peace and justice in Manipur ultimately requires sustained efforts in reconciliation, trust-building, and constitutional governance.

References

1. https://frontline.thehindu.com/the-nation/supreme-courts-moral-failure-in-manipur/article67654986.ece
2. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/a-delegation-of-six-supreme-court-judges-to-visit-relief-camps-in-violence-hit-manipur-on-march-22/articleshow/119163748.cms?from=mdr
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023%E2%80%932025_Manipur_violence
4. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/manipur-violence-sc-asks-state-to-provide-details-on-arson-encroachments-of-properties/articleshow/116131078.cms?from=mdr
5. https://www.ndtv.com/topic/supreme-court-on-manipur-violence