Manipur Internet Ban: Petitioners before Supreme Court withdraw plea to move High Court instead
Petitioners before the Supreme Court challenging the internet shutdown currently in force in Manipur withdrew their plea on Thursday while agreeing to intervene in High Court proceedings on the same issue.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud and Justices PS Narasimha and Manoj Misra recorded the submission while taking note of the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) pending before the High Court.
"At this stage, since a case is pending before the High Court...Mr Farasat seeks permission to withdraw and intervene in High Court proceedings or file an independent plea. We allow withdrawal and keep all contentions open including the submission made above."
The Supreme Court had last month declined to urgently list the petition filed by two advocates challenging the internet shutdown currently in force in the State of Manipur.
A vacation bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Rajesh Bindal said that the Manipur High Court was already hearing the matter and thus, there is no need to duplicate the proceedings.
An indefinite internet ban is in force in Manipur since May 3 after violence broke out in the State.
The clashes began after the Manipur High Court had ordered the State government to consider inclusion of the Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribe list. Tribal and non-tribal communities subsequently faced off, leading to the loss of multiple lives.
The petitioners before the apex court, lawyer Chongtham Victor Singh and businessman Mayengbam James, pointed out that despite 'a clear and admitted de-escalation' of the situation, 'grossly-disproportionate' State-wide internet shutdown orders have repeatedly been issued by the Manipur government.
The blocking orders cite law and order and anti-social elements rather than public order, and the latest extensions did not go through the oversight of review committee as prescribed by law, the petition stated.
Further, it was submitted that the orders are grossly disproportionate as they prevent residents from exercising their fundamental rights of freedom of speech and freedom to carry on trade and occupation.
The internet ban does not serve a legitimate goal, and does not have a direct nexus with the purpose of law and order given the ground situation at present, the plea further said.