Imphal, September 05, 2010: With the prolonged litigations about the competency of the government of Manipur to institute an inquiry against the armed forces of the Union of India coming to an end, the state government is now left with the liberty to deal with the recommendation made by One-man Inquiry Commission constituted against the alleged rape and murder of Thangjam Manorama by Assam Rifles personnel six years back, in 2004. Mention may made that even after the report of the inquiry commission headed by Justice (retired) C Upendra of District and Session Judges submitted with recommendations, the state government could not act on the filing of different writ petitions by the Assam Rifles, the state government and family members of Manorama.

A division bench of the Gauhati High Court, Principal Bench comprising of Justice Amitava Roy and Justice BD Agarwal had announced its judgment and order on August 31 which was reserved after the hearing at length held on May 11, 12 and 13 of this year at Guwahati, the Human Rights Law Network (Manipur) said in a statement today.

It says that the prolonged litigations about the competency of the state of Manipur to institute an inquiry against the armed forces of the Union of India arising out of the alleged rape and murder of Thangjam Manorama Devi by personnel of 17 Assam Rifles on July 11, 2004 has come to an end with the announcement of the August 31 ruling.

The judgment and order of the court was passed consequent upon the filing of different writ petitions pending with the court against the judgment and order passed on June 23, 2005 by judge D Biswas, that appointment of a commission by the state government was beyond its competence further directing the state government to hand over the report of the inquiry commission to the Union government for scrutiny thereof and appropriate action against the concerned personnel of 17 AR, if so indicated in the report, the statement of HRLN said.

Against the ruling of the court, the family of Th Manorama pleaded to the court through family counsel, Colin Gonsalves, senior advocate Supreme Court of India, (who came from Delhi specifically for the case) assisted by advocate Meihoubam Rakesh.

Colin had argued during the hearing that the acts of criminality perpetrated by a phalanx of the Assam Rifles personnel could by no means be comprehended to be within their duties as such in the aid of civil power as enshrined in the Constitution of India and as such the state of Manipur was wholly within its power and jurisdiction to appoint the Commission to probe into the facts leading to the unfortunate incident involving the deceased.

He further insisted that as the alleged act of rape and murder of Manorama by the culpable personnel of the AR are wholly unrelated to the deployment of any armed force of the Union or the power, jurisdiction, privilege and liabilities of the members thereof, in course of such detainment, but instead are gory instances of individual excesses, the challenges to the lack of the jurisdiction of the state of Manipur to constitute the commission for enquiring into the facts relatable to the incident is obviously to establish that Manorama had been raped and shot at from close range by some personnel of the Assam Rifles acting with prior consent.

The counsel urged that the offending acts were palpably illegal and inhuman besides being in defilement of basic human dignity and rights.

After hearing the parties at length, the Principal Bench of the High Court interfered to declare appointing a commission of inquiry to ascertain the facts and circumstances leading to the death of Thangjam Manorama as "legal and valid".

"Thus, the state of Manipur is left at liberty, if so advised to deal with the provisions of the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952 and other relevant provisions of law pertaining thereto," the statement of HRLN added.

It is pertinent to mention here that the bullet-riddled body of Manorama Devi was found in a field far from.

Imphal after she was arrested on the night of July 11, 2004 by personnel of the Assam Rifles.

Assam Rifles had claimed that she was a hardcore cadre of the proscribed People's Liberation Army (PLA) and was shot when she tried to escape.

Manorama's body had various scratch marks from fingers all over her body, a deep gash palpably a knife wound on her right thigh, bruises on her breasts, deep cut marks on her inner thighs, and genitals, and several bullet wounds.

The autopsy of Manorama's body was conducted at the Regional Institute of Medial Sciences Hospital (RIMS) after Irilbung police had picked up her body.

The autopsy was performed before family members who identified the body,the results of the autopsy were never released.

The bereaved family members had refused to take back Manorama's body, stating that as a murder case, an inquiry should be conducted.

Later, the government cremated the body in a public crematorium in Imphal.

A widespread protest which lasted for nearly three months was witnessed in the state and people took to the streets demanding a repeal of AFSPA alleging that the Act gave security forces the power to do what they liked.

Venting their bottled up rage, prominent women in the community protested by disrobing in front of the Assam Rifles Headquarters.

They shouted, "rape us, kill us, take our flesh" while attempting to break open the AR headquarters gate.

An indefinite curfew was immediately imposed in Imphal and the surrounding areas, although there was no let up in the protests.

In spite of the curfew, sit-in protests and mass rallies continued all over Manipur.

The prolonged people's protest was subsided only after the state Government decided to institute a Judicial Inquiry into the alleged custodial killing of Thangiam Manorama by the 17th Assam Rifles personnel.

However, government could not initiate any action with the inquiry when Assam Rifles authority challenged the validity of a judicial inquiry above a central security agency by the state government and a court martial marital was instituted.

The court martial instituted by the Assam Rifles had already completed its procedures, and four of its personnel had been already kept in confinement.

The Assam Rifles too had sought the cooperation of civil witnesses (family of Manorama Devi) to depose before it, but no one had come forward to appear before it.

Comment