Day: April 8, 2012

The institution of a separate high court for Manipur has been a long-standing demand of the state legal fraternity. And it is justified considering all the practical problems faced by litigants and in the interests of timely justice delivery. Besides, it is provided in the Constitution of India. Article 214 of the constitution clearly says ‘There shall be a High Court for each State.’ The issue could have been resolved when Manipur attained statehood in 1972. For example, a separate high court was established in Uttaranchal when it became a full-fledged state. But at that point of time the situation was such that creation of a separate High Court for Manipur was not possible, despite the fact that Constitution of India provided for the same. It was much later that, a separate Imphal Bench was created under the Gauhati High Court. As time passed, all the north eastern states in India started having a separate Bench, with the Gauhati High Court as the principal seat. In the present case of Manipur, the physical infrastructure has come into place with the inauguration of functioning of the Imphal bench of the Gauhati High Court in the spacious new complex at Chingmeirong. The Imphal Bench has been functioning out of the erstwhile Manipur Hotel complex for the last so many years. Now, the problem of inadequate courtrooms and of space constraints has been solved. On the other hand, there is no dearth of good lawyers and other legal professionals in the state. So, what excuse is there for the government of India to deny such a demand? We think not. The state Chief Minister Okram Ibobi Singh has also made his move by seeking the support of the Supreme Court and High Court judges present at the inauguration. His next move should be taking into confidence all the political parties and the entire political class. The support of civil society is also very essential. There are other justifications of a separate high court as well. Manipur’s population had increased manifold since the attainment of statehood and the number of litigants are increasing day by day. Besides the difficulties and practical problems faced by the litigants while seeking appeals at the principal seat at Guwahati in terms of costs, there are many administrative problems as well at Imphal. The registry at Imphal Bench is controlled from Guwahati. This is also one of the most important factors causing high pendency rate. Although the number of pending cases in Imphal had come sown in the recent times following the Uma Devi vs Karnataka case, 6000 pending cases is still huge for the bench. Even with the introduction of IT connectivity, there are still many practical problems in the administrative set-up. With the passage of time, the backlog of cases which need immediate hearing and disposal, is multiplying. Certain factors appear to be emanating. Many cases cannot be heard by Benches presided over by the local Judges for some reason or another. Therefore, many cases had been transferred to the Principal Benches as there was unavailability of Benches at Imphal and the same has been a costly affair for the litigants. The amount of time and financial resources spent can now be curtailed with the establishment of a separate High Court for Manipur. The Chief Justice of the High Court is the administrative head and is the first amongst equal among the Judges of a High Court. The Chief Justice sits in the principal seat at Gauhati and it is on very rare occasions that the Chief Justice presides over the Bench at Imphal, mainly for the reason that time does not permit as the Chief Justice of Gauhati High Court has to see the affairs of all the North-Eastern States of India. The superintendence befitting the administrative function of the lower Courts at Manipur has never been satisfactory by any standard as the State of Manipur does not have a separate High Court or a Chief Justice of its own, who can understand, ensure discipline and meet the requirements of the lower Courts in Manipur. In short, a separate high court should be established in Manipur.

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2012/04/separate-high-court/