Supreme Court Issues Notice In Pleas Seeking Cancellation Of Bail Granted To Accused Persons In Manipur Ethnic Violence And Gang Rape Case

The Supreme Court, today, has issued notice in the plea filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation challenging the judgment passed by the Guwahati High Court granting bail to the Accused persons, namely Arun Khundongbam@Nanao and Nameirakpam Kiran Meitei, in the Manipur rape and ethnic violence case.

The CBI, while seeking cancellation of bail granted to the accused persons, submitted that the women-victims were gangraped and then paraded by the Accused persons.

The Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi ordered, "Issue Notice. In all the items, the Chairperson of the Manipur State Legal Authority is entrusted to appoint the legal aid counsel (for victims)."

The Accused persons were arrested in July 2023, for the offences under Sections 120(B)/147/148/149/153A/302/354/354-B/34/376(2)(g) and 376-D of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with Section 3(1)d, 3(1)e, 3(1)g, 3(1)w(i), 3(1)z & 3(2)(v) of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and substantive offences thereof.

The brief case of the prosecution was that on 04.05.2023 at around 3 pm, some unknown miscreants numbering about 900-1000 carrying sophisticated weapons and suspected to be members of Meitei Leepun, Kangleipak Kanba Lup (KKL), Arambai Tenggol, and World Meitei Council (WMC), Schedule Tribe Demand Committee (STDC) entered village B. Phainom, Island Sub-Division, Kangpokpi District, Manipur, and vandalized and burnt the houses. It was further alleged that 5 villagers fled towards the forest and were rescued by the Nongpok Sekmai Police team; however, on the way, they were blocked by the mob, which snatched the 5 villagers from the custody of the police team.

It was further alleged that the father of one of the victims was killed on the spot, and 3 victim women were physically forced to remove their clothes and were stripped naked in front of the mob. It was further alleged that one of the victim women was brutally gang raped in broad daylight, and the younger brother of the victim woman was also murdered by the members of the mob, and the 3 victim women managed to escape from the mob with the help of some persons. It was on the basis of the aforesaid complaint that a case was registered on 18.05.2023 as FIR. Thereafter, the case was transferred to Nongpok Sekmai P.S., Thoubal district, Manipur, as it falls under the jurisdiction of the said police station, and accordingly, the FIR was re-registered.

Before the High Court, the Accused persons submitted that they were in custody for 2 years and yet charges had not been framed. It was further submitted that the order-sheet of the trial court indicates that on the last occasion, due to the non-appearance of the CBI prosecutor, the matter stood adjourned. It was submitted that continued incarceration without trial amounts to a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

The High Court had observed, "While the accusations here are grave and shocking, this court cannot overlook that indefinite detention without trial amounts to pretrial punishment, which is impermissible in law. This Court is conscious that there can be no straitjacket formula or universal standard for determining what period of custody amounts to “prolonged incarceration.” The assessment has to be contextual, depending upon the nature of the offence, the stage of trial, the conduct of the prosecution, and the period already undergone by the accused."

It also said, "In the present case, custody of more than two years without even the framing of charges, largely on account of prosecutorial lapses, clearly falls within the category of unjustified prolonged incarceration, thereby constituting a material change of circumstances since the rejection of the earlier bail application...In the peculiar facts of the case, including the non-commencement of the trial since the earlier bail rejection amounting to uncertainty of the conclusion of the trial at an earlier date and considering that the accused/petitioner has suffered over 2 years of pretrial custody, this court holds that the accused/petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail in the instant second bail application, subject of course, to stringent conditions, ensuring protection of victims and witnesses."

Accordingly, the matter is now listed before the Supreme Court on a further date for the response of the Accused persons.

Background

Recently, in February 2026, the Supreme Court asked the CBI, which is probing 11 FIRs related to the 2023 Manipur ethnic violence cases, to submit a status report within two weeks.

The Committee, consisting of the following three members, was constituted by the Apex Court on August 7, 2023: (i) Justice Gita Mittal, former Chief Justice of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir; (ii) Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi, former Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay; and (iii) Justice Asha Menon, former Judge of the High Court of Delhi.

The Supreme Court had said that after hearing, it will pass an order constituting a Committee of three former High Court judges to look at things apart from the investigation, like relief, remedial measures, compensation, restoration of religious places and other aspects of a humanitarian nature. On investigation, the Court said it will not supplant CBI, which will inquire into rape cases, but that it will direct that there shall be five officers of at least the DYSP rank who are brought into CBI from various states, who are conversant with Hindi language, on deputation to oversee the investigation into FIRs which are transferred to CBI.

On July 20, 2023, the Chief Justice-led Bench had taken suo motu cognizance of the incident of the two women being paraded naked and sexually assaulted, captured in a viral video shared across media platforms. The Court had remarked that "It is time that the Government really steps in and takes action because this is simply unacceptable" and had directed both the Union Government and the State Government to take immediate steps and to apprise the Court of what action has been taken. The Centre then filed an affidavit stating that the investigation be transferred to the CBI and that the trial of the case be transferred out of Manipur, to be completed within a time frame. It was thereafter that the two women approached the Supreme Court, filing an independent proceeding.

Similarly, on the issue of ethnic violence prevalent in the State of Manipur, the Court had, on July 11, considered the suggestions made by different parties to remedy the issues faced in the state and had directed that an action taken report be filed by the State within a week. The Court said that "It will review the action taken, after two weeks and is only highlighting some suggestions, but the Government can take action on all issues."

The Court is seized of a batch of pleas on the Manipur situation, including one by a ruling BJP MLA challenging the high court order on Scheduled Tribe status to the Meitei community, and a PIL by the tribal NGO for an SIT probe into the violence that has rocked the northeastern state.

Cause Title: Central Bureau of Investigation v. Arun Khundongbam@Nanao [Diary No. 7602 / 2026] and Central Bureau of Investigation v. Nameirakpam Kiran Meitei [Diary No. 7619 / 2026]