Manipur High Court
Shri. Thang Ja Thang Haokip Alias … vs State Of Manipur Represented By … on 8 May, 2026
Author: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
Bench: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
Digitally signed by
JOHN JOHN TELEN KOM
TELEN KOM Date: 2026.05.08
17:27:08 +05'30'
REPORTABLE
Suppl. Sl. Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
W.P. (Crl.) No. 11 of 2026
Shri. Thang Ja Thang Haokip alias Thongjathang Haokip aged
about 46 years, S/o Thangkhomang Haokip resident of Sawbwa
(5), Tamu Sagaing Region Mayanmar.
......Petitioner
Vs.
1. State of Manipur represented by Additional Secretary
(Home), Government of Manipur, 2nd Floor, North Block,
Room No. : 127, Manipur Secretariat Complex,
Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District,
Manipur - 795002.
2. The Union of India represented by Under Secretary
(Mayanmar), Government of India, Ministry of External
Affairs (BM Division), Room No. 28, South Block, New
Delhi - 110001.
3. The State of Manipur represented by Commissioner
(Home), Government of Manipur, 2nd Floor, Room No: 78,
South Block, Manipur Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri,
P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur -
795002.
4. The Directorate General of Police, Government of Manipur,
Manipur Police Head Quarter, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S.
Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur - 795002.
5. The Superintendent of Prison, Women Foreigners
Detention Centre, Manipur Central Jail, Imphal.
6. The Officer-in-Charge, Moreh Police Station at Moreh,
P.O. & P.S. Moreh, Tengnoupal District, Manipur- 795131.
......Respondents
Page 1 of 29
With
W.P. (Crl.) No. 12 of 2026
Shri. Onthang Baite On Thang Baite, aged about 72 years, S/o
(L) Holkhojam Baite, resident of Sawbwa (5), Tamu Sagaing
Region Mayanmar.
......Petitioner
Vs.
1. State of Manipur represented by Additional Secretary
(Home), Government of Manipur, 2nd Floor, North Block,
Room No. : 127, Manipur Secretariat Complex,
Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District,
Manipur - 795002.
2. The Union of India represented by Under Secretary
(Mayanmar), Government of India, Ministry of External
Affairs (BM Division), Room No. 28, South Block, New
Delhi - 110001.
3. The State of Manipur represented by Commissioner
(Home), Government of Manipur, 2nd Floor, Room No: 78,
South Block, Manipur Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri,
P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur -
795002.
4. The Directorate General of Police, Government of Manipur,
Manipur Police Head Quarter, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S.
Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur - 795002.
5. The Superintendent of Prison, Women Foreigners
Detention Centre, Manipur Central Jail, Imphal.
6. The Officer-in-Charge, Moreh Police Station at Moreh,
P.O. & P.S. Moreh, Tengnoupal District, Manipur- 795131.
......Respondents
Page 2 of 29
With
W.P. (Crl.) No. 13 of 2026
Shri Thang Gou Len Baite alias Thanggoulen Baite aged about
26 years S/o Lunkhomang Baite resident of Sawbwa [5] Tamu,
Sagaing, Region, Myanmar.
......Petitioner
Vs.
1. State of Manipur represented by Additional Secretary
(Home), Government of Manipur, 2nd Floor, North Block,
Room No. : 127, Manipur Secretariat Complex,
Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District,
Manipur - 795002.
2. The Union of India represented by Under Secretary
(Mayanmar), Government of India, Ministry of External
Affairs (BM Division), Room No. 28, South Block, New
Delhi - 110001.
3. The State of Manipur represented by Commissioner
(Home), Government of Manipur, 2nd Floor, Room No: 78,
South Block, Manipur Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri,
P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur -
795002.
4. The Directorate General of Police, Government of Manipur,
Manipur Police Head Quarter, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S.
Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur - 795002.
5. The Superintendent of Prison, Women Foreigners
Detention Centre, Manipur Central Jail, Imphal.
6. The Officer-in-Charge, Moreh Police Station at Moreh,
P.O. & P.S. Moreh, Tengnoupal District, Manipur- 795131.
......Respondents
Page 3 of 29
With
W.P. (Crl.) No. 14 of 2026
Shri. Thangkhogin Haokip aged about 29 years, S/o Paokholet
Haokip resident of Tamu Village PS, Tamu District Mayanmar.
......Petitioner
Vs.
1. State of Manipur represented by Additional Secretary
(Home), Government of Manipur, 2nd Floor, North Block,
Room No. : 127, Manipur Secretariat Complex,
Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District,
Manipur - 795002.
2. The Union of India represented by Under Secretary
(Mayanmar), Government of India, Ministry of External
Affairs (BM Division), Room No. 28, South Block, New
Delhi - 110001.
3. The State of Manipur represented by Commissioner
(Home), Government of Manipur, 2nd Floor, Room No: 78,
South Block, Manipur Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri,
P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur -
795002.
4. The Directorate General of Police, Government of Manipur,
Manipur Police Head Quarter, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S.
Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur - 795002.
5. The Superintendent of Prison, Women Foreigners
Detention Centre, Manipur Central Jail, Imphal.
6. The Officer-in-Charge, Moreh Police Station at Moreh,
P.O. & P.S. Moreh, Tengnoupal District, Manipur- 795131.
......Respondents
Page 4 of 29
With
W.P. (Crl.) No. 15 of 2026
Shri. Ginkhosat Touthang aged about 43 years, S/o Jamsei
Touthang resident of Sawbwa (5), Tamu Sagaing Region
Mayanmar.
......Petitioner
Vs.
1. State of Manipur represented by Additional Secretary
(Home), Government of Manipur, 2nd Floor, North Block,
Room No. : 127, Manipur Secretariat Complex,
Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District,
Manipur - 795002.
2. The Union of India represented by Under Secretary
(Mayanmar), Government of India, Ministry of External
Affairs (BM Division), Room No. 28, South Block, New
Delhi - 110001.
3. The State of Manipur represented by Commissioner
(Home), Government of Manipur, 2nd Floor, Room No: 78,
South Block, Manipur Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri,
P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur -
795002.
4. The Directorate General of Police, Government of Manipur,
Manipur Police Head Quarter, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S.
Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur - 795002.
5. The Superintendent of Prison, Women Foreigners
Detention Centre, Manipur Central Jail, Imphal.
6. The Officer-in-Charge, Moreh Police Station at Moreh,
P.O. & P.S. Moreh, Tengnoupal District, Manipur- 795131.
......Respondents
Page 5 of 29
BEFORE
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH
For Petitioners :: Mr. Tungrei Ngakang, Advocate along with
Ms. Chan Kashung, advocate
For Respondents :: Mr. Soraisham Chittaranjan, Additional
Advocate General for Manipur along with Mr.
A. Priyokumar Sharma, Advocate for
respondent Nos.1,3,4,5 & 6;
Mr. N. Nongdamba, Advocate for respondent
No. 2, led by Mr. Kh. Samarjit, Senior
Advocate and Deputy Solicitor General of
India (DSGI)
.
Date of Hearing :: 08.05.2026
Date of Judgment & Order :: 08.05.2026
COMMON JUDGMENT AND ORDER
(ORAL)
(M. Sundar, CJ)
[1] Mr. Tungrei Ngakang, learned counsel on record for writ petitioners
in all 5(five) captioned ‘Writ Petitions’ (‘WPs’ in plural and ‘WP’ in singular for the
sake of brevity and convenience) is before this Court.
[2] Learned counsel for writ petitioners submits that the captioned 5
WPs are directly and squarely covered by a common judgement/order dated
11.03.2026 made in W.P.(Cril.) Nos. 4 to 7 of 2026.
[3] Learned counsel for writ petitioners has placed before this Court a
copy of the aforesaid common judgement/order dated 11.03.2026 in W.P.(Cril.)
Nos. 4 to 7 of 2026 and reproduction of the same is as follows:
Page 6 of 29
‘IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
W.P. (Crl.) No. 4 of 2026Shri. Lalnunmawia Gangte, aged about 26 years, S/o (L)
Rochhunga Gangte, resident of Tamu village, P.S. Tamu, Tamu
District Mayanmar.
……Petitioner
Vs.
1. Special Secretary (Home), Government of Manipur, Manipur
Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang,
Imphal East District, Manipur – 795002.
2. State of Manipur represented by Commissioner (Home),
Government of Manipur, Manipur Secretariat Complex,
Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District,
Manipur – 795002.
3. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Home
Affairs, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi –
110001.
4. The Directorate General of Police, Government of Manipur,
Manipur Police Head Quarter, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S.
Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur – 795002.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Manipur Central Jail Sajiwa,
Foreigner Detention Centre, P.S. Lamlong, Imphal East
District, Manipur – 795001.
6. The Officer-in-Charge, Moreh Police Station at Moreh, P.O.
& P.S. Moreh, Tengnoupal District, Manipur – 795131.
……Respondents
With
W.P. (Crl.) No. 5 of 2026
Shri. Lunkhothang Baite alias Lhunkhothang Baite, aged about
46 years, S/o Jamlhun Baite, resident of Tamu village, P.S. Tamu,
Tamu District Mayanmar.
……Petitioner
Vs.
1. Special Secretary (Home), Government of Manipur, Manipur
Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang,
Imphal East District, Manipur – 795002.
2. State of Manipur represented by Commissioner (Home),
Government of Manipur, Manipur Secretariat Complex,
Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District,
Manipur – 795002.
3. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Home
Affairs, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi –
110001.
Page 7 of 29
4. The Directorate General of Police, Government of Manipur,
Manipur Police Head Quarter, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S.
Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur – 795002.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Manipur Central Jail Sajiwa,
Foreigner Detention Centre, P.S. Lamlong, Imphal East
District, Manipur – 795001.
6. The Officer-in-Charge, Moreh Police Station at Moreh, P.O.
& P.S. Moreh, Tengnoupal District, Manipur – 795131.
……Respondents
With
W.P. (Crl.) No. 6 of 2026
Shri. Jamkholal Mate, aged about 45 years, S/o (L) Thongsei
Mate, resident of Tamu village, P.S. Tamu, Tamu District
Mayanmar.
……Petitioner
Vs.
1. Special Secretary (Home), Government of Manipur, Manipur
Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang,
Imphal East District, Manipur – 795002.
2. State of Manipur represented by Commissioner (Home),
Government of Manipur, Manipur Secretariat Complex,
Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District,
Manipur – 795002.
3. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Home
Affairs, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi –
110001.
4. The Directorate General of Police, Government of Manipur,
Manipur Police Head Quarter, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S.
Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur – 795002.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Manipur Central Jail Sajiwa,
Foreigner Detention Centre, P.S. Lamlong, Imphal East
District, Manipur – 795001.
6. The Officer-in-Charge, Moreh Police Station at Moreh, P.O.
& P.S. Moreh, Tengnoupal District, Manipur – 795131.
……Respondents
With
W.P. (Crl.) No. 7 of 2026
Shri. Janglenpao Baite, aged about 25 years, S/o Ngamtong
Baite, resident of Tamu village, P.S. Tamu, Tamu District
Mayanmar.
……Petitioner
Vs.
Page 8 of 29
1. Special Secretary (Home), Government of Manipur, Manipur
Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang,
Imphal East District, Manipur – 795002.
2. State of Manipur represented by Commissioner (Home),
Government of Manipur, Manipur Secretariat Complex,
Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District,
Manipur – 795002.
3. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Home
Affairs, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi –
110001.
4. The Directorate General of Police, Government of Manipur,
Manipur Police Head Quarter, Mantripukhri, P.O. & P.S.
Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur – 795002.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Manipur Central Jail Sajiwa,
Foreigner Detention Centre, P.S. Lamlong, Imphal East
District, Manipur – 795001.
6. The Officer-in-Charge, Moreh Police Station at Moreh, P.O.
& P.S. Moreh, Tengnoupal District, Manipur – 795131.
……Respondents
BEFORE
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH
For Petitioners :: Mr. Tungrei Ngakang, Advocate
For Respondents :: Mr. Th. Vashum, Deputy Government
Advocate for respondent Nos. 1,2,4,5 & 6;
Mr. N. Nongdamba, Advocate for respondent
No. 3, led by Mr. Kh. Samarjit, Senior Advocate
and Deputy Solicitor General of India (DSGI)
Date of Hearing :: 11.03.2026
Date of Judgment & Order :: 11.03.2026
COMMON JUDGMENT AND ORDER
(ORAL)
(M. Sundar, CJ)
11.03.2026
[1] In the captioned four ‘Writ Petitions’ (‘WPs’ in plural and ‘WP’ in
singular, for the sake of brevity and convenience), writ petitioners are citizens
of Myanmar and are therefore foreign nationals in Union of India. Writ
petitioners entered India along with several others {81 (eighty one) persons
Page 9 of 29
in all} and they were arrested on 27.01.2023 at about 4:00 am by police from
Moreh Police station. A common FIR (First Information Report) being FIR
dated 27.01.2023 bearing FIR No. 4(1)2023, MRH-PS on the file of Moreh
Police Station in Tengnoupal District, Manipur, was lodged. In and by this FIR,
81 (eighty one) persons in all {including 4 (four) writ petitioners} were alleged
to have violated Section 14 of ‘the Foreigners Act 1946 (31 of 1946)’
(hereinafter ‘said Act’ for the sake of convenience and clarity) for alleged
illegal entry and stay in Indian territory. Writ petitioners were produced before
the ‘Judicial Magistrate First Class, Moreh, Manipur’ (hereinafter, ‘said JM’ for
the sake of convenience) on 27.01.2023 i.e., on the same day and the said
JM remanded petitioners to judicial custody. Thereafter, petitioners were
granted default bail. Petitioners complied with the bail conditions and release
orders were also made. When things stood thus, ‘R-1’ {Special Secretary
(Home), Government of Manipur} made an order dated 12.01.2026 bearing
Reference No. H-802/11/2025-HD-HD repatriating the 24 (twenty four) out
of the aforesaid 81 (eighty one) Myanmar Nationals with a direction to hand
over the 24 (twenty four) persons to Myanmar authorities at Tamu through
the Immigration Officer, Moreh on 04.02.2026. It is now learnt that R-1 made
another order of even date i.e., order dated 12.01.2026 bearing Reference
No. H-1701/282/2023-HD-HD repatriating 3 (three) more persons from and
out of the 81 (eighty one) Myanmar Nationals. In these circumstances, a
representation dated 24.02.2026 has been sent by 9 (nine) individuals and
the four addressees are R-2 {Commissioner (Home) Government of Manipur},
R-4 (Director General of Police, Government of Manipur), Superintendent of
Police, Tengnoupal District, Manipur and R-5 (Superintendent of Police,
Sajiwa Jail, Imphal, Manipur). A scanned reproduction of this representation
dated 24.02.2026 (received by R-2) on 26.02.2026 is as follows:
Page 10 of 29
Page 11 of 29
Page 12 of 29
Page 13 of 29
[2] Mr. Tungrei Ngakang, learned counsel for writ petitioners,
adverting to the afore-referred representation, submitted that in the
tabulation at the end of the representation, writ petitioner in captioned W.P.
(Crl.) No. 4 of 2026 (Lalnunmawia Gangte) is Sl. No. 5, writ petitioner in
captioned W.P. (Crl.) No. 5 of 2026 (Lunkhothang Baite @ Lhunkhothang
Baite) is Sl. No. 3, writ petitioner in captioned W.P. (Crl.) No. 6 of 2026
(Jamkholal Mate) is Sl. No. 1 and writ petitioner in captioned W.P. (Crl.) No.
7 of 2026 (Janglenpao Baite) is Sl. No. 2.
[3] Learned counsel submitted that 4 (four) writ petitioners are
similarly placed qua afore-referred 27 (twenty seven) individuals who have
been repatriated vide two separate orders (made by R-1) both dated
12.01.2026 about which there is allusion elsewhere supra in this order.
[4] Issue notice. [5] Mr. Th. Vashum, learned State counsel, accepts notice for R-1,
R-2, R-4, R-5 and R-6, Mr. Nongdamba Naorem, learned counsel, accepts
Page 14 of 29
notice for R-3 and Mr. Kh. Samarjit, learned senior advocate and Deputy
Solicitor General of India (DSGI) appears on his behalf. To be noted, ‘R-1’ is
an abbreviation denoting ‘1st respondent’ and similar abbreviations have
been used in the instant order with regard to other respondents also.
[6] Though in the admission board, owing to the limited perimeter
within which the matter has to perambulate and in the light of the order this
Court proposes to make, this Court with the consent of all the aforesaid
learned counsel as well as learned senior counsel/DSGI, took up the main
WPs and heard out the same.
[7] There is no disputation or contestation between the parties that
writ petitioner in one of the captioned writ petitions, namely, W.P. (Crl.) No.
5 of 2026 (Lunkhothang Baite @ Lhunkhothang Baite) came to this Court
earlier with regard to this very issue vide W.P. (Crl.) No. 3 of 2026 and the
same was disposed of by this court vide an order dated
10.02.2026, which reads as follows:
‘Sl. No. 1(Suppl)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHALWP(Cril.)No.3 of 2026
Lunkho Thang Baite alias Lunkhothang Baite aged about
46 years S/O Zam Lhun Baite alias Jamlun resident of
Tamu village, PS Tamu, Tamu District Myanmar.
Petitioner
Vs.
1 State of Manipur represented by
Commissioner(Home), Government of Manipur,
Manipur Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri, PO & PS
Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur-795002.
2 Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Home
Affairs, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi-
110001.
3. The Director General of Police, Government of
Manipur, Manipur Police Head Quarter, Mantripukhri,
PO & PS Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur-
795002.
4. The Superintendent of Police, Manipur Central Jail
Sajiwa, Foreigner Detention Centre, PS Lamlong,
Imphal East District, Manipur-795001.
5. The Officer-in-Charge, Moreh Police Station at Moreh,
PO & PS Moreh, Tengnoupal District, Manipur-795131.
Respondents
BEFORE
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH
Page 15 of 29
(ORDER)
(Order of the Court was made by M. Sundar, CJ)
10.02.2026.
[1] Captioned ‘Writ Petition’ (‘WP’ for the sake of brevity) has been
filed inter alia with a Habeas Corpus prayer.
[2] Factual matrix in a nutshell is that writ petitioner was arrested
on 27.01.2023; that an FIR being FIR 04(01)2023 on the file of Moreh
Police Station in Moreh Sub-Division, Tengnoupal District, Manipur
was registered; that vide this FIR, it was alleged that writ petitioner has
violated Section 14 of ‘the Foreigner Act 1946 (31 of 1946)’ (hereinafter
‘said Act’ for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity) i.e., illegal
entry and staying in Indian territory; that it is admitted case of writ
petitioner that he is a citizen of Myanmar; post FIR, writ petitioner was
produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate Court i.e. ‘Court of
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Moreh’ (‘said Magistrate Court’ for the
sake of convenience and clarity); that said Magistrate court, on the
same day i.e., 27.01.2023 made a warrant for interim custody; that
thereafter, writ petitioner appears to have sought bail (to be noted
neither the bail petition nor the bail order have been placed before us);
that a release order has been made by said Magistrate Court and this
release order is dated 02.05.2023; that this release order has also
been assailed by writ petitioner (in addition to Habeas Corpus plea) in
the captioned WP; that the release order imposes conditions of two
sureties to be furnished besides personal bond of Rs. 50,000/-; that
post release order, admittedly writ petitioner has not been able to
comply with the bail conditions of furnishing two sureties and therefore
continues to remain incarcerated in the Foreign detention Centre
situate in Manipur Central Jail Sajiwa; that thereafter the Special
Secretary(Home), Government of Manipur made an order dated
12.01.2026 bearing reference No.H-1701/282/2023-HD-HD
repatriating 3(three) individuals by exercising power under Section
11(1); that on the same day i.e.12.01.2026, the Special
Secretary(Home) made another repatriation order bearing reference
No.H-802/11/2025-HD-HD repatriating 24 other individuals; that
thereafter writ petitioner and 8(eight) others (9 in all) have sent a
representation dated 04.02.2026 to R1,R3 and R4 and also the
Superintendent of Police Saijiwa Jail Imphal inter-alia seeking
deportation/repatriation to Myanmar and some other requests such as
return of personal mobile phone have also been made in this
representation.
[3] Mr. Tungrei Ngakang, learned counsel for writ petitioner
submitted that writ petitioner is languishing in the Detention Centre for
more than 3(three) years now i.e., from 27.01.2023 and therefore,
Habeas Corpus plea has been made. As regards the Habeas Corpus
plea, it is made clear that writ petitioner continues to be in Detention
Centre only owing to non-compliance with the condition in the bail
order/release order i.e., condition to furnish sureties. This means that
this not a case of illegal detention. Therefore, a Habeas Corpus plea
will not lie. Be that as it may, if writ petitioner is aggrieved by
conditions imposed for release vide the release order, it is always open
to the writ petitioner to seek appropriate remedy in the appropriate
Page 16 of 29
court inter alia seeking modification/deletion of the conditions for
release. This right of the writ petitioner is preserved but the Habeas
Corpus plea is rejected.
[4] This takes this Court to the representation i.e., representation
dated 04.02.2026 made by writ petitioner and 8 others (9 in all) about
which there is allusion supra. This representation shall be referred to
as ‘said representation’ for the sake of convenience.
[5] At the outset, we notice that said representation is dated
04.02.2026, it has been received by the office of DGP (Director
General of Police) P.H.Q, Manipur Imphal on same day i.e.,
04.02.2026 and the captioned writ petition has been filed on
09.02.2026. However, considering the nature of the matter we are
looking into said representation.
[6] Adverting to said representation, learned counsel for writ
petitioner submitted that similarly placed persons i.e., 27(twenty
seven) in all have been repatriated by two repatriation orders, both
dated 12.01.2026 (details of which have been set out supra) but writ
petitioner has not been given such benefit of repatriation and this
according to learned counsel for writ petitioner is lack of parity.
[7] Issue notice to respondents. [8] Mr. Vashum, learned State counsel accepts notice for R 1,3, 4
& 5. Mr. N. Nongdamba, learned counsel accepts notice for R2 and
Mr. Kh. Samarjit, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India(DSGI) and
senior counsel appears on behalf of Mr. N. Nongdamba,.
[9] Though in the admission Board, with the consent of all the
aforesaid learned counsel and senior counsel, main WP was taken up
on the short point pertaining to said representation.
[10] As regards said representation, Mr. Vashum, learned
State counsel pointed out that said representation is dated 04.02.2026
and it has been received on the same day, there have been only two
working days thereafter and at the highest barely 4(four) days
thereafter as the captioned WP has been filed yesterday (09.02.2026).
Learned State counsel submitted that the representation can be
examined on merits by R1 {State of Manipur represented by
Commissioner(Home), Government of Manipur, Manipur Secretariat
Complex, Mantripukhri, PO & PS Heingang, Imphal East District,
Manipur-794002}
[11] As regards R2, learned DSGI and learned senior
counsel very fairly submitted that in the light of the trajectory the matter
has taken, there is no role for Respondent No.2 at this juncture.
[12] To be noted, one of the prayers i.e., the second limb of
the prayer vide (b) of the prayer paragraph writ petitioner has made a
prayer to quash the 02.05.2022 release order. If the release order is
quashed writ petitioner will remain incarcerated. We accept the fervent
plea of learned counsel for writ petitioner that this may be treated as
quashing the conditions in the release order i.e., the condition to
produce sureties. We take this liberal view considering the nature of
the matter but with a caveat that other matters will be dealt with on a
case to case basis.
[13] Before concluding, it is necessary to write that ‘R1’ is
an abbreviation denoting ‘first respondent’ and similar abbreviations
have been used with regard to other respondents also.
Page 17 of 29
[14] In the light of the narrative, discussion and dispositive
reasoning set out thus far, the following order is made:
(i) the Habeas Corpus plea is rejected as it is not a case of illegal
detention;
(ii) plea to quash the release order dated 02.05.2023 is not acceded to
but the rights of writ petitioner to seek modification/deletion of the
conditions for release in the appropriate court under appropriate
provision of law is preserved. If such a course is adopted by writ
petitioner, the court concerned shall consider the matter on its own
merits and in accordance with law untrammeled by instant order;
(iii) other prayers pertaining to declaration that the detention is illegal,
release on personal bond and direction to respondent to issue
temporary stay permission are rejected.
[15] As regards said representation i.e., representation
dated 04.02.2026, a scanned reproduction of the same is as
follows:
Page 18 of 29
Page 19 of 29
[16] To be noted, writ petitioner is serial No.8 in the
tabulation part of said representation. R1 is directed to consider the
aforesaid representation on its own merits and in accordance with
law, particularly with reference to the point that similarly placed
persons have been repatriated/deported and make a speaking
order. We make it clear that this exercise shall be done by R1 by
considering the said representation on its own merits and in
accordance with law. A speaking order shall be made as
expeditiously as possible but in any event within 6(six) weeks from
today i.e., on or before 24.03.2026.
[17] The speaking order thus made in the aforesaid manner
shall be duly served on writ petitioner under due acknowledgement
within one week from the date of making of the order and in any
event, the outer limit will be 31.03.2026. It is made clear that if thePage 20 of 29
writ petitioner is aggrieved by the aforesaid speaking order, all the
rights and contentions of writ petitioner are preserved to assail the
same in a manner known to law.
[18] Captioned WP is disposed of in the aforesaid manner.
There shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE John Kom PS I : Upload forthwith
PS II : All concerned will remain bound by this order when
uploaded in the official website of High Court which is QR
coded.
FR/NFR’
All learned counsel on both sides agree that a similar
order can be made.
[8] Before we do that, for the sake of clarity and specificity,
we deem it appropriate to write that in respect of W.P. (Crl.) No. 4 of
2026 (Lalnunmawia Gangte) the date of release order made by said
JM is 10.05.2024 and with regard to the other three writ petitioners in
W.P. (Crl.) No. 5 of 2026 (Lunkhothang Baite @ Lhunkhothang baite),
W.P. (Crl.) No. 6 of 2026 (Jamkholal Mate) and W.P. (Crl.) No. 7 of
2026 (Janglenpao Baite), date of release order is 02.05.2023.
[9] As regards one of the captioned writ petitions, namely,
W.P. (Crl.) No. 5 of 2026 (Lunkhothang Baite @ Lhunkhothang Baite
-writ petitioner) he is the writ petitioner in afore referred earlier W.P.
(Crl.) No. 3 of 2026. Mr. Tungrei Ngakang, learned counsel for
petitioners, submits that when the earlier writ petition, W.P. (Crl.) No.
3 of 2026 was moved, he did not have adequate instructions regarding
conditions of bail particularly sureties and therefore he erroneously
stated that sureties have not been furnished but it now comes to light
that sureties have been furnished and it is after furnishing of sureties
that the release order has been made by learned said JM on
02.05.2023. Therefore, as regards one of the captioned writ petitions,
namely, W.P. (Crl.) No. 5 of 2026, we treat the same as a review plea
(with consent of all afore-referred counsel) by exercising our inherent
constitutional powers. To be noted, considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, the nature of the matter, the manner in
which writ petitioners are circumstanced as also the fair stand of
learned counsel for writ petitioners, we resort to treating W.P. (Crl.)
No. 5 of 2026 as a review as a one oft matter making it clear that this
will not serve as a precedent in all and every case to follow. Therefore,
Page 21 of 29
the sequitur is, instant order will govern W.P. (Crl.) No. 5 of 2026 in
place of order dated 10.02.2026 made in W.P. (Crl.) No. 3 of 2026
which now stands reviewed and rercalled. In the light of the
common/joint submission made in unison by both sides that a similar
order as in W.P. (Crl.) No. 3 of 2026 (earlier order dated 10.02.2026)
can be made, we proceed to make the following order:
(a) we direct the Commissioner (Home) Government of
Manipur, Manipur Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri, PO &.
PS Heingang Imphal East District Manipur 795002 to dispose
of the afore-referred representation (said representation)
dated 24.02.2026 (scanned and reproduced elsewhere supra
in instant order), as expeditiously as the official business of
the officer would permit but in any event within three weeks
from today, i.e., on or before 01.04.2026;
(b) we direct the afore-referred Commissioner (Home) (to
be noted, ‘Commissioner (Home)’ is representing ‘State’ and
has been described as ‘R-2’ in the captioned WPs) to consider
the said representation on its own merit and in accordance
with law particularly with reference to the point that similarly
placed persons have been repatriated/deported by exercising
powers under Section 11(1) of said Act;
(c) we direct R-2 to make a speaking order; (d) we make it clear that afore-referred exercise shall be
done by R-2 by considering the said representation on its own
merits and in accordance with law as already alluded to
supra;
(e) the speaking order made by R-2 in the aforesaid
manner shall be duly served on each of the writ petitioners
under due acknowledgment within one week from the date
of making of the order and in any event on or before
08.04.2026.
[10] Before concluding, this Court makes it clear that if writ
petitioners, any one of the writ petitioners or some of the writ
petitioners are either not satisfied or aggrieved by the speaking
order/s to be made by R-2 in the aforesaid manner, it is open to writ
petitioner/s to assail the same in a manner known to law and if such
a scenario unfurls the challenge will be considered on its own merits
and in accordance with law;
[11] Captioned WPs are disposed of in the aforesaid manner.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Page 22 of 29
[4] Issue notice to respondents. [5] Mr. Soraisham Chittaranjan, learned Addl. Advocate General for
Manipur along with Mr. A. Priyokumar Sharma, learned State counsel accepts
notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 3 to 6, N. Nongdamba, learned counsel
accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2 and senior advocate and learned
Deputy Solicitor General of India (DSGI) Mr. Kh. Samarjit appears on his behalf.
[6] Considering the limited scope of the captioned WPs, all the afore-
referred counsel on both sides agreed to have main WPs taken up and disposed
of without affidavits-in-opposition.
[7] Learned Addl. Advocate General, Mr. Soraisham Chittaranjan and
learned DSGI, Mr. Kh. Samarjit very fairly submitted that an order akin to afore-
referred judgment/order dated 11.03.2026 in WP(Cril.)Nos. 4 to 7 of 2026 can
be made in the instant cases also. This makes the legal drill at hand qua disposal
of captioned 5(five) WPs fairly simple.
[8] Learned counsel for writ petitioners submits that in the cases at
hand, the 5 (five) writ petitioners along with 4(four) others (9 in all) have sent
a common representation dated 24.02.2026. The copy of this representation
placed before this Court brings to light that this ‘24.02.2026 common
representation’ (‘said representation’ for the sake of convenience and brevity)
has been received by respondent No.3 on 26.02.2026 itself and captioned WPs
have been presented in this Court on 07.05.2026.
Page 23 of 29
[9] A scanned reproduction of said representation dated 24.02.2026 is
as follows:
Page 24 of 29
Page 25 of 29
Page 26 of 29
Page 27 of 29
[10] In the light of the narrative thus far, we make a similar
judgement/order i.e., a judgment/order akin to common order dated 11.03.2026
made in WP(Cril.) Nos. 4 to 7 of 2026 and give the following directions:
(a) we direct the Commissioner (Home) Government of Manipur,
Manipur Secretariat Complex, Mantripukhri, PO &. PS Heingang
Imphal East District Manipur 795002 to dispose of the afore-
referred representation (said representation) dated 24.02.2026
(scanned and reproduced elsewhere supra in instant order), as
expeditiously as the official business of the officer would permit
but in any event within four weeks from today, i.e., on or before
05.06.2026;
(b) we direct the afore-referred Commissioner (Home) {to be noted,
‘Commissioner (Home)’ is representing ‘State’ and has been
described as ‘R-3′ in the captioned WPs} to consider the said
representation on its own merits and in accordance with law
particularly with reference to the point raised by writ petitioners’
counsel, i.e., that similarly placed persons have been
repatriated/deported by exercising powers under Section 11(1)
of the Foreigners Act 1946 (31 of 1946);
(c) we direct R-3 to make a speaking order qua disposal of said
representation;
(d) we make it clear that afore-referred exercise shall be done by
R-3 by considering the said representation on its own merits and
Page 28 of 29
in accordance with law albeit with reference to point raised
about which there is allusion supra in previous directive as
already alluded to supra;
(e) the speaking order made by R-3 in the aforesaid manner shall
be duly served on each of the writ petitioners under due
acknowledgment within one week from the date of making of
the order and in any event on or before 12.06.2026.
[11] Before concluding, this Court makes it clear that if writ petitioners,
any one of the writ petitioners or some of the writ petitioners are either not
satisfied or aggrieved by the speaking order/s to be made by R-3 in the aforesaid
manner, it is open to writ petitioner/s to assail the same in a manner known to
law and if such a scenario unfurls such challenge will be considered on its own
merits and in accordance with law;
[12] Captioned WPs are disposed of in the aforesaid manner inter-alia
with afore-referred directions. There shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE FR/NFR John Kom P.S. I : Upload forthwith
P.S. II : All concerned will stand bound by web copy uploaded in High Court website
inter alia as the same is QR coded.
Page 29 of 29
