Manipur High Court
Ngariyanbam Robash Singh vs Superintendent Of Police on 15 April, 2026
Author: A. Bimol Singh
Bench: A. Bimol Singh
SHOUGRAKPAM Digitally signed by
SHOUGRAKPAM IN. 7 & 8
DEVANANDA DEVANANDA SINGH
Date: 2026.04.15 18:24:27
SINGH +05'30'
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
Cril. Petn. No. 28 of 2026
Ngariyanbam Robash Singh ... Petitioner
Vs.
Superintendent of Police, Imphal West
District & anr. ... Respondents
With
MC(Cril. Petn.) No. 22 of 2026
B E F O R E
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. BIMOL SINGH
O R D E R
15-04-2026
[1] Heard Mr. Ph. Sanajaoba, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner.
Issue notice upon the respondents, returnable within two
weeks.
As Mr. Niranjan Sanasam, learned GA entered appearance
and accepts notice on behalf of the respondents, no formal notice is
called for.
[2] The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 read with Article 227 of the
Constitution of India with a prayer to quash the relevant portion of the
impugned order dated 06-04-2026 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st
Class, Imphal East, Manipur, in FIR No. 10(04)/2026 SMG-P.S. U/S
17/20 UA(P) Act.
Cril. Petn. No. 28 of 2026 & anr. Contd.../-
-2-
[3] It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the
Informant in connection with the above-mentioned FIR and while he
was producing the Accused No. 2, i.e., Laitonjam Ramakanta Meitei @
Bothe before the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Imphal East, Manipur,
praying for remanding to police custody of the said accused person in
connection with the said FIR, the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Imphal.
East, passed an order dated 06-04-2026 impugned in the present
petition.
[4] By the said impugned order, the Judicial Magistrate 1st
Class, Imphal East, directed the Superintendent of Police, Imphal West,
to register an FIR against the petitioner and other police personnel
involved in perpetration of atrocities against the said Accused No. 2
and to ensure that fair investigation is conducted.
[5] According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,
the said order has been passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class on
the complaint made by the said Accused No. 2 that he was laid out
on a table and beaten by some commando personnel in plain clothes
in Commando Complex of CDO/IW at Minuthong after his arrest in
connection with the said FIR. Because of the said atrocities being
committed to the Accused No. 2, he was unable to walk.
[6] Taking into consideration such oral complaint being made
by the Accused No. 2 and after examination of the person of the Accused
No. 2 by the Judicial Magistrate and on seeing the injuries caused to his
body allegedly due to the atrocities being committed by the petitioner
Cril. Petn. No. 28 of 2026 & anr. Contd…/-
-3-
and other police personnel, the Judicial Magistrate passed the impugned
order.
[7] It has been submitted by Mr. Ph. Sanajaoba, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner that Section 175(3) and (4) of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 provides that a Magistrate, empowered
under Section 210 of the BNNS, can order for making an enquiry as
provided under Section 175(1) of the BNSS strictly in compliance
with the provision of law as provided under sub-section (3) and (4)
of Section 175 of BNSS. It has been submitted that, in the present
case, there was no compliant in writing supported by affidavit as
provided under sub-section (3) of Section 175 and without following
such procedure established by law, the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class,
Imphal East, passed the impugned order. It has been submitted by
the learned counsel that unless an interim order is passed for protecting
the right and interest of the present petitioner, he will be in grave
prejudice.
[8] Mr. Niranjan Sanasam, learned GA appearing for the
respondents No. 1 and 2 submitted that if and when such an FIR as
directed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Imphal East is registered,
the said registration of the FIR will be on the complaint made by the
Accused No. 2 and as such, it has been submitted by the learned GA
that the aforesaid Accused No. 2 will be a necessary party in this
proceeding.
In the absence of such necessary party being impleaded, the present
petition is not maintainable. The learned GA further submitted that he
Cril. Petn. No. 28 of 2026 & anr. Contd…/-
-4-
may be given two weeks’ time to get instruction from the respondents
and to revert back to this court.
[9] In view of the submission made by the learned counsel
appearing for the parties, list these cases again on 15-05-2026 for further
consideration. However, it is made clear that no coercive action shall be
taken up by the respondents against the present petitioner till the next
date of hearing. The maintainability of the present petition in the absence
of the necessary party will be considered on the next date.
JUDGE
Devananda
Cril. Petn. No. 28 of 2026 & anr. Contd.../-