The Supreme Court on Wednesday extended till July 31, 2026, the tenure of the court-appointed committee constituted in the backdrop of gender-based violence during the sectarian strife in Manipur.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant observed that since no formal extension of the committee’s mandate had been recorded after July 2025, its continuation required regularisation. The Court accordingly extended the committee’s tenure until July 31, 2026.
In response to the protracted ethnic violence in Manipur, the Supreme Court, invoking its plenary powers under Articles 32 and 142 of the Constitution, had constituted the high-level committee in August 2023 to ensure justice, rehabilitation, and institutional redress for victims, with a particular emphasis on survivors of sexual violence.
The committee was headed by Justice Gita Mittal, former Chief Justice of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court, and included Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi, former judge of the Bombay High Court, and Justice Asha Menon, former judge of the Delhi High Court. The panel was mandated to adopt a victim-centric and rights-based framework anchored in constitutional guarantees and India’s international human rights obligations, including those under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).
Apart from facilitating legal aid and psychosocial support, the Justice Mittal-led committee was entrusted with supervising the grant of compensation and restitution to victims of violence, including losses arising from damage to movable and immovable property. The apex court expressly authorised the committee to issue directions to the State of Manipur for the assessment and disbursal of compensation, consistent with the principles of restorative justice and statutory mechanisms such as Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, read with the applicable victim compensation schemes.
The committee was directed to submit fortnightly status reports directly to the Supreme Court, thereby ensuring sustained judicial oversight. Earlier, a Bench headed by then Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud had observed that the objective behind constituting the panel was twofold: first, to restore public confidence in the justice delivery system, and second, to reaffirm the primacy of the rule of law in a situation marked by administrative failure and institutional breakdown.
The Supreme Court had also expressed deep anguish over the targeting of women during the sectarian violence, holding that sexual crimes perpetrated in such circumstances amount to a grave violation of constitutional morality and infringe the fundamental rights to dignity, personal liberty, and bodily autonomy guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. The Court reiterated that the State bears an affirmative and non-derogable obligation to prevent gender-based violence and to protect women from such atrocities, in line with settled jurisprudence in Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty and Nipun Saxena v. Union of India.
The proceedings were initiated after the Court took suo motu cognisance of disturbing viral videos depicting two tribal women being paraded naked and sexually assaulted amid the violence in Manipur. Subsequently, the survivors approached the apex court alleging that the Manipur Police had colluded with the mob, thereby enabling the commission of sexual violence instead of discharging their constitutional obligation to prevent it.
Upon examining the material on record, the Supreme Court criticised the pace of investigation, describing it as tardy, and flagged significant delays between the occurrence of heinous offences—including murder, rape, and arson—and the registration of zero FIRs or regular FIRs, in clear derogation of the mandate of prompt investigation under the Code of Criminal Procedure and established judicial precedent.
While declining to constitute a Special Investigation Team, the Court appointed former IPS officer Dattatray Padsalgikar to supervise and monitor the investigation to ensure fairness, accountability, and procedural integrity. To further insulate the trial process from local influence, the Court directed the Chief Justice of the Gauhati High Court to designate courts in Guwahati, Assam, for the conduct of trials in cases involving sexual violence against women and children that were transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation at the instance of the Manipur government.
The Supreme Court has earlier clarified that the trials in these transferred cases will continue before the designated courts in Guwahati, reiterating its commitment to ensuring a fair, impartial, and expeditious adjudication for victims of the Manipur violence.
The post Manipur violence: Supreme Court extends tenure of Justice Gita Mittal Committee till July 31 appeared first on India Legal.