Manipur Violence: Supreme Court grants interim protection in sedition case against lawyer who accompanied fact-finding team

The lawyer moved the Court contending that the FIR was based a press release that she did not sign, and that the contents of the said press release were not seditious.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted interim protection to a lawyer who was charged with sedition after she accompanied a fact-finding team to enquire into the recent violence in Manipur [Deeksha Dwivedi v. State of Manipur & Anr].

The Court ordered that no coercive action be taken against the lawyer, advocate Deeksha Dwivedi.

The interim order was passed after the matter was mentioned before a bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud and Justices PS Narasimha and Manoj Misra by Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave.

In her plea before the top court, Dwivedi submitted that she had accompanied a two-woman team from the National Investigation Forum for Women (NIFW) as an independent lawyer and observer.

The NIFW team is stated to have concluded that certain violent incidents in Manipur were State-sponsored. A press conference was held at Imphal on July 1 after the enquiry, and a press release was also issued on the team’s findings.

Following this, a first information report (FIR) was registered against Dwivedi and NIFW representatives for sedition, defamation, making assertions prejudicial to national-integration and allied offences by the Manipur Police on July 8.

The lawyer, however, highlighted that while the FIR was based on the press release issued by the NIFW team, she had not signed the press release.

Further, she contended that the neither were contents of the press release seditious nor did they attract the other offences alleged under Sections 153, 153B, 499, 504, 505 (2) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Moreover, there were no untoward reactions or incidents as a consequence of this press release, the petitioner added.

“The contents of the press release are based on the interviews with the local women and are bonafide representations of their concerns, bringing forth their account of incidents … The Petitioner conveyed the sense of frustration and helplessness that they had encountered in the relief camps. It is submitted that similar reports have found place in several national newsprint and national media, which only goes to further strengthen that none of the contents of the said press release either make any factually incorrect statement and/or seek to mislead the public,” the plea stated.

Appearing for Dwivedi before the top court, Senior Advocate Dave today sought a stay on her arrest.

Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, however, countered that the petitioner could have approached the High Court.

It was not appropriate to claim that approaching the High Court was not possible, the SG said. Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves had previously appeared in a similar case before the High Court, the Court was told.

The Court noted that the petitioner did not have a copy of the FIR and accordingly, directed the SG to serve a copy of the FIR to the petitioner.

The SG was also instructed to gather more information about the background of the case.

The Court then listed listed for further hearing on July 14, Friday. In meanwhile, no coercive steps should be taken against the petitioner, the Court directed.

The article is published on barandbench.com