The arrested five All Tribal Student’s Union, Manipur (ATSUM) leaders, who were remanded to 15-day judicial custody by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Imphal West, were released from Sajiwa jail after the IO of the case submitted the closure report on ground of insufficiency of evidences and the court accepted the closure report on Monday.
The ATSUM leaders who have been released from the jail are Paotinthang Lupheng, 45, son of Paohao Lupheng of Khomunnom village, Churachandpur; Andria Sinruwng, 36, son of SR Ngamdil of Unopat village, Chandel district; Khaiminlen Doungel, 35, son of Douthang Doungel of Hengjang Leimakhong, Kangpokpi district; Marankhai Awungshi, 31, son of AS Wungkato of Tashar Village, Ukhrul, presently staying at Nagaram Imphal and John H Pulamte, 51, son of late Lalthlunglien of Rengkai, Churachandpur district, presently staying at Zone III, National Game Village, Imphal West district.
They were picked up by Imphal West police on August 2 morning ahead of ATSUM’s proposed bandh called to press the state government for tabling and passing of the Manipur (Hill Areas) ADC Bill, 2021 recommended by the Hill Areas Committee.
ALSO READ: ATSUM shutdown: Police vehicle set ablaze in Ukhrul
The investigating officer submitted that calling of bandh/blockade or enforcement of bandh/blockade are offences of criminal conspiracy under section 120-A IPC, punishable under 120-B(2) IPC and Section 503 and 506 IPC. It shall also amount to commission of offence under Section 141 IPC and punishable under section 143 IPC, the IO submitted.
It was alleged that the accused persons criminally conspired to impose an economic blockade in the hill districts of Manipur and circulated statements/reports which has put many people in fear and disturbed the public peace. It was submitted that the said blockade had wrongfully restrained many persons, including passengers and other commercial vehicles plying along the highways.
ALSO READ: ATSUM-Hill Areas Committee-TA & Hills minister talks inconclusive
Then, on Monday, the IO of the case submitted a closure report before the court stating there is insufficient evidence to substantiate the charges against the accused. Therefore, the IO of the case submitted the final report to be considered before the court.
During the court proceeding, the court asked the complainant to give his statement but the complainant has no objection in the nature of the investigation and findings, therefore the court accepted the closure report as the complainant has no objection in the closure report.
