A Manipur court has ordered the trial of 12 security personnel in connection with a 2009 fake encounter case that allegedly led to the killing of a civilian. The order marks a major development in one of the many long-pending cases of alleged extra-judicial killings in the state, often linked to counter-insurgency operations. The court’s decision has rekindled hope among families of victims seeking justice for more than a decade.
Read More: Why EC Excluded Assam from SIR List
The case pertains to the death of a 22-year-old man identified as Sanjit Meitei, who was allegedly gunned down in broad daylight by security forces in Imphal on July 23, 2009. The incident sparked massive protests across the state after photographs published by local media appeared to show Sanjit being taken alive into a pharmacy and later lying dead inside it. The images contradicted the official version of events, which initially claimed that Sanjit was killed during an armed encounter with insurgents.
Following public outrage and intense scrutiny from human rights organizations, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) took over the case in 2010. The agency filed charge sheets against several members of the Manipur Police commandos and officers from the state police force, alleging that the encounter was staged. However, the case moved slowly through the courts for years due to procedural delays and jurisdictional issues.
After reviewing the CBI’s findings and hearing detailed arguments, the special CBI court in Imphal directed that 12 security personnel, including senior officers, face trial. The court observed that there was sufficient prima facie evidence suggesting that the accused were involved in staging the encounter. It also ordered that charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including murder, criminal conspiracy, and destruction of evidence, be framed against them.
The court’s ruling was hailed by human rights activists and civil society groups in Manipur, who have long campaigned against what they describe as a culture of impunity under the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA). “This decision gives renewed hope to families who have waited years for accountability,” said Babloo Loitongbam, a leading rights activist from Human Rights Alert. He added that the judgment could pave the way for progress in other pending cases of alleged extrajudicial killings.
Family members of Sanjit Meitei expressed relief over the order, saying it was a long-awaited step toward justice. His mother, who has consistently attended court hearings since 2009, told reporters that she still hopes to see those responsible held accountable. “For 15 years, we have carried this pain. This order is a small victory for all the mothers who lost their sons in fake encounters,” she said, her voice breaking with emotion.
The CBI investigation had earlier revealed that there was no evidence of any crossfire or exchange of bullets near the scene of the incident. Ballistic reports, forensic findings, and eyewitness accounts all pointed toward a premeditated killing. The agency concluded that the encounter was staged to portray security success during heightened insurgency operations in the state at that time.
Legal experts noted that while the court’s decision is a positive development, the trial process may still face hurdles due to the complexity of the case and the number of accused. Many similar cases in Manipur remain unresolved despite CBI intervention, often delayed by procedural challenges and the need for sanction from higher authorities to prosecute security personnel.
According to the Extrajudicial Execution Victim Families Association, Manipur (EEVFAM), over 1,500 alleged fake encounter cases occurred between 1979 and 2012. The association, which represents families of the victims, has been fighting a long legal battle in the Supreme Court seeking independent investigation and prosecution in such cases. In 2017, the Supreme Court directed the CBI to investigate several of these incidents, describing them as serious human rights violations.
The 2009 case became symbolic of the larger debate surrounding the AFSPA and the alleged misuse of power by security forces in conflict-ridden regions. The Act grants special powers to armed forces to operate in “disturbed areas,” but critics argue that it has shielded personnel from accountability for human rights abuses. Successive governments have maintained that AFSPA remains necessary to combat insurgent threats in Manipur and other northeastern states.
Public reaction to the court’s order has been largely positive across the state. Social organizations and student unions welcomed the development, calling it a “moment of justice long denied.” They urged authorities to ensure that the trial proceeds without delay and that similar cases are revisited to bring closure to affected families.
Meanwhile, security officials involved in the case have maintained their innocence, claiming they acted within the law during counter-insurgency operations. Their defense lawyers have stated that they will challenge the order in a higher court. However, the CBI has insisted that its investigation was thorough and based on clear evidence that the encounter was fabricated.
As the case moves to trial, it could set an important precedent for accountability in regions affected by long-standing internal conflicts. For many in Manipur, the court’s order signals a slow but significant shift toward justice and transparency in addressing alleged human rights abuses.
The next hearing has been scheduled for later this month, where the court will formally frame charges against the accused. Families of victims and human rights advocates are hopeful that the proceedings will mark a turning point in the decades-old struggle against impunity in Manipur.
Read More: Nagaland staff demand transparent IAS induction
