Manipur High Court
Smt. Jimit Alias Kimi Alias Yee Myint ... vs State Of Manipur Represented By ... on 27 April, 2026
Author: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
Bench: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
Digitally signed by
JOHN JOHN TELEN KOM
`ca
TELEN KOM Date: 2026.04.28
19:01:16 +05'30'
Sl. No. 2(suppl.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
W.P. (Crl.) No. 9 of 2026
1. Smt. Jimit alias Kimi alias Yee Myint aged about 39 years W/o (L)
Chawmia alias Zaw Min Oo alias Zaw Min Oo resident of Mangswa
Khutan village, P.S. Monywa, Mangswa District, Sagaing Division,
Mayanmar.
2. Smt. Mimue alias Sangtei aged about 21 years D/o Jimit alias Kimi Yee
Myint (Mother) and (L) Chawmia alias Zaw Min Oo resident of Mangswa
Khutan village, P.S. Monywa, Mangswa District, Sagaing Division,
Mayanmar.
3. Baby Somia Thah alias Saw Myat Htet's 14 years D/o Jimit alias Kimi
alias Yee Myint (Mother) and (L) Chawmia alias Zaw Min Oo resident
of Mangswa Khutan village, P. S. Monywa, Mangswa District, Sagaing
Division, Mayanmar.
......Petitioners
Vs.
1. State of Manipur represented by Additional Secretary (Home),
Government of Manipur, 2nd Floor, North Block, Room No: 127, Manipur
Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East
District, Manipur-795002.
2. The Union of India represented by Under Secretary (Mayanmar),
Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs (BM Division), Room
No. 28, South Block, New Delhi-110011.
3. The State of Manipur represented by Commissioner (Home),
Government of Manipur, 2nd Floor, Room No.78, South Block, Manipur
Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri, PO & PS Heingang, Imphal East
District, Manipur-795002.
Page 1 of 9
4. The Directorate General of Police, Government of Manipur, Manipur
Police Head Quarter, Mantripukhri, PO & PS Heingang, Imphal East
District, Manipur-795002.
5. The Superintendent of Prison, Women Foreigners Detention Centre,
Manipur Central Jail, Imphal.
6. The Officer-in-Charge, Moreh Police Station at Moreh, PO & PS Moreh,
Tengnoupal District, Manipur-795131.
......Respondents
BEFORE
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH
For Petitioners :: Mr. Tungrei Ngakang, Advocate
For Respondents :: Mr. Chittaranjan, Addl.AG for respondent Nos.
1,3,4,5 & 6 and Mr. Kh. Samarjit, DSGI
instructed by Mr. N. Nongdamba for
respondent No.2
Date of Hearing :: 27.04.2026
Date of Judgment & Order :: 27.04.2026
JUDGMENT AND ORDER
(ORAL)
(M. Sundar, CJ) [1] Captioned 'Writ Petition' ('WP' for the sake of convenience and brevity) pertains to deportation/repatriation of the 3(three) writ petitioners who according to the learned counsel for writ petitioners are citizens of Mayanmar. [2] Mr. Tungrei Ngakang, learned counsel on record for the 3(three) writ petitioners is before this Court (physical Court). Learned counsel submits that writ petitioner No.3 who is daughter of writ petitioner No.1 is a minor and therefore, writ petitioner No.3 is represented by her mother i.e., writ petitioner No.1.
Page 2 of 9 [3] Learned counsel for writ petitioner submits that the 3(three) writ petitioners along with 22(twenty two) others were arrested on 05.10.2021 by 20 Assam Rifles in Indian Territory and handed over to Moreh Police Station and 'First Information Report' ('FIR' for the sake of convenience and brevity) was registered inter-alia alleging offences under Sections 468/471 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) {45 of I860}, section 51(b) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 (53 of 2005) and section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 (31 of 1946). It is further submitted that petitioner No.1 applied for bail in the Court of jurisdictional 'Judicial Magistrate First Class' ('JMFC' for the sake of convenience and brevity) i.e., JMFC Moreh, bail was granted and on compliance of bail conditions release order was also issued on 02.03.2024.
[4] Learned counsel for writ petitioners submits that in and vide communication dated 24.11.2025 bearing reference No. B-2/17/2004-MCJ, respondent No.5 (The Superintendent of Prison, Women Foreigners Detention Centre, Manipur Central Jail, Imphal) has sent a communication to the Director General of Police (Prisons), Government of Manipur, Imphal inter-alia giving a list of Myanmar Nationals who are now under detention at Women Foreigners Detention Centre at Manipur Central Jail, Imphal. Learned counsel for writ petitioners submits that this list of inmates was given for the purpose of deportation process and this is reflected in the communication itself. It is also pointed out that writ petitioner Nos. 1 ,2 & 3 are Sl. Nos 8,9 & 13 respectively in the tabulation qua 24.11.2025 communication. It is also submitted by learned Page 3 of 9 counsel for writ petitioners that similarly placed persons have got the benefit of repatriation orders vide section 11(1) of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
[5] Issue notice to respondents. [6] Mr. Soraisham Chittaranjan Singh, learned Addl. Advocate (Addl.
AG) General who is in Court and who is assisted by Yambem Max Singh, learned advocate accepts notice for respondent Nos. 1,3,4,5 & 6. Mr. N. Nongdamba, learned counsel who is present in Court (physical Court) accepts notice for respondent No.2 and Mr. Kh. Samarjit, learned Senior Advocate and learned Deputy Solicitor General of India (DSGI) appears on his behalf. [7] Learned Addl. AG for State of Manipur, Mr. Soraisham Chittaranjan Singh very fairly submits that the deportation/repatriation process is underway and the cases of the writ petitioners are under consideration. [8] In the light of the narrative thus far, with the consent of all the afore-referred learned counsel on both sides, main WP was taken up and heard out.
[9] It was brought to notice of this Court by learned counsel for writ petitioners that a representation dated 15.04.2026 has been sent inter-alia to respondent No.3 (The State of Manipur represented by Commissioner (Home), Government of Manipur, 2nd Floor, Room No.78, South Block, Manipur Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri, PO & PS Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur- 795002) and the same has been received by respondent No.3 on 17.04.2026 and for the present, learned counsel for writ petitioners de-scopes the prayer in the Page 4 of 9 WP and he submits that it would suffice if there is a direction to respondent No.3 to dispose of the representation dated 15.04.2026 on its own merits and in accordance with law.
[10] To be noted, a scanned reproduction of this representation dated 15.04.2026 along with endorsement demonstrating receipt by respondent No.3 on 17.04.2026 as placed in the case file is as follows:
Page 5 of 9 Page 6 of 9 Page 7 of 9
[11] Learned counsel for writ petitioners submits that writ petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 are at serial Nos. 8 and 12 respectively in the tabulation in the representation containing the list of signatories. It is also to be noted that, as already alluded to supra, writ petitioner No.3 is a minor and she is represented by her mother who is writ petitioner No.1.
[12] In the light of the narrative thus far, considering what unfurls in the hearing, more particularly owing to learned counsel for writ petitioners de- scoping the prayer, we deem it appropriate to make a simple order directing respondent No.3 to continue the consideration of repatriation/deportation and dispose of the afore-referred representation dated 15.04.2026 as regards the 3(three) writ petitioners on its own merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as the official business of respondent No.3 would permit but in any event on or before 29.05.2026. To be noted, 29.05.2026 denotes 6(six) weeks from the date receipt of afore-referred representation by respondent No.3. [13] The afore-referred representation disposed of in the aforesaid manner by respondent No.3 shall be by way of a speaking order and the same shall be served on each of the writ petitioners within 5(five) working days from the date on which the order of disposal is made and such service shall be under due acknowledgement from the respective addressees.
[14] Though obvious, we make it clear that if writ petitioners are either not satisfied or aggrieved by the disposal of the afore-referred representation in the aforesaid manner, it is open to writ petitioners to assail the same in a manner Page 8 of 9 known to law and for this purpose, all questions raised in the captioned WP are left open and it is further made clear for the sake of specificity that for the purpose of such a possible future scenario, all questions in captioned WP are left open for both sides.
[15] Captioned WP is disposed of in the aforesaid manner. There shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE FR/NFR John Kom P.S. I : Upload forthwith
P.S. II : All concerned will stand bound by web copy uploaded in High Court website inter alia as the same is QR coded.
Page 9 of 9