State Of Manipur vs Chungkhomang Kipgen on 28 July, 2026

Manipur High Court

State Of Manipur vs Chungkhomang Kipgen on 28 July, 2026

Author: A. Guneshwar Sharma

Bench: A. Guneshwar Sharma

                                                                Item No. 22
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
                          AT IMPHAL
                    MC(CRL. A.) No. 27 of 2024

State of Manipur
                                                          ... Applicant
                               - Versus -
Chungkhomang Kipgen
                                                        ... Respondent


                       BEFORE
         HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA


                           O R D E R

[M. Sundar, CJ]
28.07.2026

[1] Mr. M. Devananda, learned senior counsel and ‘Additional

SPONSORED

Advocate General’ (‘Addl. AG’ for the sake of brevity) for State of

Manipur instructed by Ms. Jyotsana, learned State counsel for

‘Miscellaneous Case’ (‘MC’ for the sake of convenience) applicant is

before this Court (Physical Court).

[2] To be noted, there is no representation for respondent

either in the Physical Court or on the Video Conferencing (VC) platform

though respondent has been duly served, respondent has entered

appearance through counsel and names of counsel on record for

respondent (Pashel Omega Anal, P. Roluni, Reikhe Namai, Charnim

Jamang, Mr. RS Livingstone) are duly shown in the cause list.

Page 1|2
[3] Be that as it may, learned Addl. AG very fairly submits that

the question as to whether a statutory appeal under Section 21 of ‘NIA

Act, 2008‘ (‘NIA Act‘ for the sake of brevity and convenience) can be

entertained beyond 90 (ninety) days is pending before Hon’ble

Supreme Court.

[4] Captioned matter is to be heard out only on the basis of

verdict of Hon’ble Supreme Court, is further say of learned Addl. AG.

[5] In the light of the narrative thus far and with the intention

of giving opportunity to respondent and learned counsel on record for

respondent, captioned matter is adjourned sine die. It is made clear

that it is open to both sides to mention for listing after Hon’ble Supreme

Court returns a verdict or after any order made in the aforesaid matter

which is Hon’ble Supreme Court is seized of.

       [6]                Adjourned sine die.




                                             JUDGE               CHIEF JUSTICE
       Bipin



KHOIROM Digitally
          KHOIROM
                   signed by


BIPINCHAN BIPINCHANDRA
          SINGH

DRA SINGH Date: 2026.07.29
          11:02:12 +05'30'




                                                                         Page 2|2