In a recent public interest litigation on the escalating violence against women in Manipur, the Indian Supreme Court has intervened due to the unprecedented magnitude of the issue. The Chief Justice, DY Chandrachud, responded to those questioning why this particular state was receiving more attention, stating that the violence against women in Manipur occurred in the context of communal and sectarian strife, leading to an unparalleled level of brutality.
The petition presented to the court detailed 11 incidents of sexual violence, including rape, murder, and abduction. Disturbingly, all the victims were Kuki-Zo women who were targeted and subjected to brutal attacks by a mob of Meitei men. This distinction is crucial as both United Nations organizations and the penal code consider these cases as separate crimes under section 376(2)(g).
During the proceedings, the Chief Justice’s remarks brought back memories of Sushma Swaraj’s anguish in Parliament following the heinous December 2012 gang rape case. However, it is important to note that the two crimes, although equally abhorrent, cannot be compared. The 2012 case was a horrific crime against a young student and was a shocking display of brutality on the streets of the capital city, Delhi.
The violence against Kuki-Zo women in Manipur represents a different issue altogether. It involves the selective targeting of a specific community, occurring under the watch, and possibly with the complicity, of the police that reports to a Meitei chief minister. The situation in Manipur has reached a point where mobs have successfully looted government armories, leaving them heavily armed. As the Chief Justice highlighted, there has been a complete breakdown of the constitutional machinery in the state.
If any comparison is to be made, it is with Bilkis Bano’s case, whose petition challenging the remission granted to the 11 men responsible for her rape and the murder of her family members during the 2002 Gujarat riots is still pending before the apex court.
One significant difference in the past decade is the sad reality that sexual violence against women and girls has become disturbingly routine, while our condemnation of such crimes has become influenced by our political inclinations. This is evident when the bar association in Kathua organizes a demonstration in support of convicted rapists and murderers, or when the rape and murder of a five-year-old child in Kerala becomes an opportunity for political parties to mock one another.
Sexual violence continues to be a tragic reality in our country. However, choosing which incidents to express outrage and anger over based on political agendas indicates a lapse in our moral compass. The Supreme Court’s intervention and unambiguous comments on the Manipur situation are undoubtedly welcomed, but they may not be sufficient to repair our broken conscience. It is crucial for society as a whole to recognize the severity of the issue and take collective action to address and prevent such heinous crimes.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s intervention in response to the unprecedented magnitude of violence against women in Manipur reflects the gravity of the issue. The targeted attacks on Kuki-Zo women by Meitei men, the breakdown of constitutional machinery, and the selective outrage displayed in response to sexual violence highlight the pressing need for a collective effort to combat this ongoing tragedy. By acknowledging the severity of the problem and engaging in meaningful action, society can work towards a safer and more equitable future for all.
