The Supreme Court of India has issued a notice to the Union Government of India in response to a petition filed by the State of Nagaland, seeking sanction to prosecute 30 Indian Army personnel accused of killing 13 civilians during a mistakenly wrong Military operation in Mon district on December 2021.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra has demanded a response from the Ministry of Defence within six weeks. The Nagaland government challenged the Centre’s refusal on February 28, 2023, to grant prosecution sanction under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) 1958.
Background of the Incident
The tragic incident occurred on December 4, 2021, when the Army’s 21 Para Special Force mistakenly opened fire on a pickup truck carrying coal miners in Oting village, killing six of them instantly. The Army claimed they had misidentified the civilians as insurgents. Following the initial ambush, angry villagers confronted the soldiers, resulting in further firing that killed seven more civilians and a soldier.
Legal Proceedings and Arguments
Nagaland's Advocate General KN Balagopal presented evidence collected by the state police's Special Investigation Team (SIT) against the accused Army personnel, including a Major. Despite this, the Centre denied the sanction for prosecution, which the Nagaland government argued was done "arbitrarily and against public interest."
In July 2022, the Supreme Court had stayed the criminal prosecution of the Army personnel, noting the absence of the required sanction under AFSPA. This stay followed petitions from the wives of the accused, who claimed that their husbands were being unfairly prosecuted without the necessary permissions.
Read more: ITLF Calls for Union Territory for Kuki-Zo Community Amid Ethnic Conflict in Manipur.
State’s Appeal and AFSPA Controversy
The State of Nagaland has invoked Article 32 of the Constitution, alleging a violation of fundamental rights. The petition emphasizes that the Army’s ambush team failed to follow protocol, as they did not challenge the occupants of the vehicle or provide a warning before opening fire, which is mandated under the law. The state's plea also highlighted the lack of basic understanding by the Army personnel of local customs, as carrying hunting guns is common in Nagaland.
The incident has reignited debates over the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), with the Nagaland Assembly passing multiple resolution to demand the repeal of AFSPA from the state. The Act grants security forces in "disturbed areas" extensive powers, including the right to search, arrest, and use force.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court's notice to the Centre marks a significant step in addressing the legal and ethical complexities surrounding the incident. The court’s decision in this matter could have profound implications for the application of AFSPA and the accountability of armed forces personnel in conflict zones. The Centre's response, due in six weeks, will be crucial in determining the course of this high-profile case.
Stay tuned for more updates, visit "In Bulletin".
