JOIN THE LCW
COMMUNITY

Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, quarterly analytics report, curated expert talks, merchandise and much more. Support our work!

Sign up today

Authorities demolish three churches in Manipur's Imphal for 'illegal construction'

Reported by

Sarup Sinha

Legal Review by

Priyansha Chouhan, Anmol Gupta

Edited by

Anupa Sagar Kujur

Updated by

Published on

December 1, 2023

Edited on

State

Manipur

Sector

Infrastructure

People Affected by Conflict

Households Affected by Conflict

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

ha

Starting Year

2020

Location of Conflict

Imphal East District

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Urban Development (Other than Smart Cities)

Land Conflict Summary

Three churches in the Tribal Colony of Imphal East district were demolished by local authorities in the wee hours of April 11, 2023.
The All Manipur Christian Organisation (AMCO), the apex body representing the Christian community in Manipur, said the eviction drive at the Evangelical Baptist Convention Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church Manipur and Catholic Holy Spirit Church was carried out at 3 am when people were still sleeping. The body alleged that families living within the church premises, including pastors and caretakers were not given sufficient time to move their belongings. Many Christian residents gathered at the sites to perform prayers in the wake of the demolitions.
Condemning the evictions, the AMCO and the United Christian Forum of North East India (UCFNEI) criticised the state government for showing a lack of regard for religious sanctity and sentiments.
AMCO's joint secretary Rev L Manga said, "We are all in shock. We fully respect and acknowledge the law of the land and the government's decision. However, the manner they carried out the eviction is unacceptable because they (the government) didn't give us sufficient time and conducted the drive in the wee hours at 3 am when people were sleeping".
The eviction order, which includes the three churches, was served on December 24, 2020, by the sub-divisional officer of Porompat, alleging that 13 encroachers had encroached on government land via churches and garages.
The issue reached the High Court of Manipur after the All-Tribal Students' Union Manipur (ATSUM) petitioned the government to overturn the eviction order of eight churches in the Tribal Colony. The High Court had then passed the interim order for maintaining the status quo in the land under dispute.
On April 4, 2023, the High Court retracted its interim status quo order and allowed the government to take appropriate measures to vacate the land. In its order, the High Court relied upon a 2009 Supreme Court ruling to justify the State Cabinet's decision to remove churches build on government land. The churches contesting the matter argued that the religious structures had been in existence since 1974 and 1997 without any objection and interruption. The Court held that the churches had been built on government land without prior approval of the state government.
After the eviction, AMCO called the government's approach as discriminatory as it had previously regularised 188 religious structures in the state based on the Supreme Court's directives, but not a single church was included in the list.
The Christian bodies have submitted a memorandum to Prime Minister Narendra Modi through the Manipur Governor, seeking redress and resolution for the affected churches. They also plan to consult with various national organisations to address the reported atrocities faced by fellow Christians in the state.

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Complaint against procedural violations

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for regularization of unauthorized constructions

Region Classification

Urban

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Religious/Sacred/Cultural value

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Legislations/Policies Involved

Manipur Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1978
Section 2(e) [Definition of public premises to mean land belonging to the state government] Section 3 [State government authorities are required to issue notice to person involved in unauthorized occupation of public premises, within ten days of receiving information about such occupation]
Manipur Policy for Review of Unauthorized Construction of Religious Nature on Public Parks, Public Places etc., 2010, Manipur State Government, dated April 3, 2010
State Level Committee must be constituted under this policy to review unauthorized constructions of a religious nature on public premises. District Level Committee may be constituted for the purpose of removal/ relocation/ regularization of such religious structures.
Union of India v. State of Gujarat (Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.8519 of 2006, Supreme Court)
  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

No

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Forced evictions/dispossession of land

Non-consultation with stakeholders

Legal Status:

In Court

Status of Case In Court

Disposed

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

No

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Manipur High Court

Case Number

MC (WP(C)) No.88 of 2023

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

In 2023, the State Government filed a writ petition in the Manipur High Court against interim orders passed in February 2021 and August 2022 which prevented them from removing unauthorized religious structures. On September 29, 2009, the Supreme Court had passed an interim order in SLP (c) 8519/2006, directing state governments to review existing unauthorized constructions of a religious nature on a case-to-case basis. On December 7, 2009, the Supreme Court had directed state governments to frame a policy regarding the same issue. On the basis of this order, the Manipur State Government framed a policy in April 2010 and constituted District level Committees for reviewing religious structures. On April 4, 2023, the High Court disposed of the matter. The Court observed that the two churches contesting the appeal had been constructed on government land without approval of the state authorities. The Court further observed that cases of regularisation should be left to the “wisdom of the government”. According to the Court, if the government is not inclined to regularise unauthorised structures in public places, these structures can be removed, irrespective of any complaints. The Court finally held that the respondent churches had failed to prove that they were constructed with the approval of the state authorities. The decision of the state to evict the churches was held to be on the basis of documents, policy decision and in compliance with the Supreme Court order.

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

No items found.

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

Reported Details of the Violation:

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Additional Information

Nature of Protest

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Protests/marches

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Government of Manipur, District Administration of Imphal East, Committee of Unauthorised Construction of Religious Nature on Public Streets, Public Parks, Public Places, etc (Manipur)

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

All Manipur Christian Organisation and United Christian Forum of North East India

Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Resources

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Images

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Video

Three churches in the Tribal Colony of Imphal East district were demolished by local authorities in the wee hours of April 11, 2023.
The All Manipur Christian Organisation (AMCO), the apex body representing the Christian community in Manipur, said the eviction drive at the Evangelical Baptist Convention Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church Manipur and Catholic Holy Spirit Church was carried out at 3 am when people were still sleeping. The body alleged that families living within the church premises, including pastors and caretakers were not given sufficient time to move their belongings. Many Christian residents gathered at the sites to perform prayers in the wake of the demolitions.
Condemning the evictions, the AMCO and the United Christian Forum of North East India (UCFNEI) criticised the state government for showing a lack of regard for religious sanctity and sentiments.
AMCO's joint secretary Rev L Manga said, "We are all in shock. We fully respect and acknowledge the law of the land and the government's decision. However, the manner they carried out the eviction is unacceptable because they (the government) didn't give us sufficient time and conducted the drive in the wee hours at 3 am when people were sleeping".
The eviction order, which includes the three churches, was served on December 24, 2020, by the sub-divisional officer of Porompat, alleging that 13 encroachers had encroached on government land via churches and garages.
The issue reached the High Court of Manipur after the All-Tribal Students' Union Manipur (ATSUM) petitioned the government to overturn the eviction order of eight churches in the Tribal Colony. The High Court had then passed the interim order for maintaining the status quo in the land under dispute.
On April 4, 2023, the High Court retracted its interim status quo order and allowed the government to take appropriate measures to vacate the land. In its order, the High Court relied upon a 2009 Supreme Court ruling to justify the State Cabinet's decision to remove churches build on government land. The churches contesting the matter argued that the religious structures had been in existence since 1974 and 1997 without any objection and interruption. The Court held that the churches had been built on government land without prior approval of the state government.
After the eviction, AMCO called the government's approach as discriminatory as it had previously regularised 188 religious structures in the state based on the Supreme Court's directives, but not a single church was included in the list.
The Christian bodies have submitted a memorandum to Prime Minister Narendra Modi through the Manipur Governor, seeking redress and resolution for the affected churches. They also plan to consult with various national organisations to address the reported atrocities faced by fellow Christians in the state.

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Complaint against procedural violations

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for regularization of unauthorized constructions

Region Classification

Urban

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Legislations/Policies Involved

Manipur Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1978
Section 2(e) [Definition of public premises to mean land belonging to the state government] Section 3 [State government authorities are required to issue notice to person involved in unauthorized occupation of public premises, within ten days of receiving information about such occupation]
Manipur Policy for Review of Unauthorized Construction of Religious Nature on Public Parks, Public Places etc., 2010, Manipur State Government, dated April 3, 2010
State Level Committee must be constituted under this policy to review unauthorized constructions of a religious nature on public premises. District Level Committee may be constituted for the purpose of removal/ relocation/ regularization of such religious structures.
Union of India v. State of Gujarat (Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.8519 of 2006, Supreme Court)
  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

No

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Forced evictions/dispossession of land

Non-consultation with stakeholders

Legal Status:

In Court

Status of Case In Court

Disposed

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

No

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Manipur High Court

Case Number

MC (WP(C)) No.88 of 2023

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

In 2023, the State Government filed a writ petition in the Manipur High Court against interim orders passed in February 2021 and August 2022 which prevented them from removing unauthorized religious structures. On September 29, 2009, the Supreme Court had passed an interim order in SLP (c) 8519/2006, directing state governments to review existing unauthorized constructions of a religious nature on a case-to-case basis. On December 7, 2009, the Supreme Court had directed state governments to frame a policy regarding the same issue. On the basis of this order, the Manipur State Government framed a policy in April 2010 and constituted District level Committees for reviewing religious structures. On April 4, 2023, the High Court disposed of the matter. The Court observed that the two churches contesting the appeal had been constructed on government land without approval of the state authorities. The Court further observed that cases of regularisation should be left to the “wisdom of the government”. According to the Court, if the government is not inclined to regularise unauthorised structures in public places, these structures can be removed, irrespective of any complaints. The Court finally held that the respondent churches had failed to prove that they were constructed with the approval of the state authorities. The decision of the state to evict the churches was held to be on the basis of documents, policy decision and in compliance with the Supreme Court order.

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

No items found.

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

Reported Details of the Violation:

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Nature of Protest

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Protests/marches

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Government of Manipur, District Administration of Imphal East, Committee of Unauthorised Construction of Religious Nature on Public Streets, Public Parks, Public Places, etc (Manipur)

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

All Manipur Christian Organisation and United Christian Forum of North East India

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Documented By

Text Link

Reviewed By

Text Link

Updated By

Text Link

Edited By

Text LinkLand Conflict Watch

Other Land Conflicts in Manipur

cross
Not a member yet?
Sign up now