Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Manipur High Court

Okram Nutankumar Singh vs State Of Manipur And Another on 22 July, 2025

Author: Ahanthem Bimol Singh

Bench: Ahanthem Bimol Singh

SHAMURAILATPAM SUSHIL Digitally signed by SHAMURAILATPAM
                      SUSHIL SHARMA
SHARMA                Date: 2025.07.23 11:03:13 +05'30'
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
                                    AT IMPHAL

                                    PIL No. 4 of 2025

                Okram Nutankumar Singh
                                                    Petitioner
                                         Vs.
                State of Manipur and another

                                              Respondents
                                  Clubbed with MC(PIL) No. 7 of 2025

                                 BEFORE
         HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. KEMPAIAH SOMASHEKAR
             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH

                                        ORDER

(K. Somashekar, C.J.) 22.07.2025 Learned counsel Mr. O. Kiranjit for the petitioner is present. Similarly, the learned AG Mr. Lenin Hijam is also present but the aforesaid AG in these matters is seeing some short accommodation whereas this writ petition in the nature of Public Interest Litigation has initiated in the year 2025 but no report has been secured by the competent authority but this writ petition has initiated keeping in view the provision of Section 21(2) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

However, the learned AG in this matter is seeking some short accommodation on the premises that he wants to secure some report from the competent authority whereas keeping in view the issues in between the petitioner and the respondents are of, it is deemed appropriate that the learned AG be directed to clarify the position whether the Secretary of Page | 1 Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India is required to be arrayed as necessary party to secure this specific report from the competent authority but keeping in view Section 21(2) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

Accordingly, made an observation.

Similar direction is also issued to the learned counsel for the petitioner in these matters to clarify the status whether the Secretary of Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India is required to be arrayed as necessary party in this Public Interest Litigation to address the issues in between the petitioner and the respondents in respect of the Chairperson and also members as mandatory under Section 21(2) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

Accordingly, made an observation.

Consequently, these matters would be listed on 14th August, 2025.

                    JUDGE                             CHIEF JUSTICE
Sushil




                                                                    Page | 2