In a significant ruling on Tuesday, the Supreme Court of India set aside the criminal proceedings against the Army personnel implicated in the killing of 13 civilians during a botched operation in Nagaland’s Mon district in December 2021. The court’s decision comes nearly three years after the tragic incident that led to widespread outrage across the region.

Supreme Court’s Decision

The Supreme Court, while delivering its verdict, quashed the ongoing criminal proceedings against the Army personnel mentioned in the First Information Reports (FIRs) linked to the incident. The court’s ruling brings a legal closure to the case unless further sanctions are granted for pursuing the matter.

“The proceedings in the impugned FIRs shall stand closed. However, if sanction is granted, it may be taken to its logical conclusion. On disciplinary action, we have said the Armed Forces can do the needful,” the Supreme Court stated. This indicates that if approval is granted under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) or Section 6 of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), the case could still proceed to its “logical conclusion.”

 The Incident

On December 4, 2021, a tragic incident occurred in the Mon district of Nagaland when an Army team mistakenly opened fire on a truck carrying local miners in Oting village. The miners were wrongfully identified as militants, leading to the death of six civilians. The situation quickly spiralled out of control when security forces allegedly fired again, resulting in the deaths of seven more civilians as local residents reacted with anger and violence. The operation, aimed at curbing insurgency in the region, tragically led to the loss of innocent lives.

The killings sparked widespread protests and led to national debates on the functioning of the Armed Forces, particularly in areas governed under the controversial AFSPA. This act gives the military broad powers in “disturbed areas,” which includes arresting individuals and conducting operations with relative immunity from prosecution.

Public and Political Outcry

The incident drew sharp criticism from the public and various political leaders, who demanded accountability for the deaths. Several human rights groups condemned the use of AFSPA in Nagaland, asserting that such laws led to impunity and were prone to misuse. The tragedy brought to the forefront the longstanding demand for the repeal of AFSPA in the northeast, with protests calling for justice for the victims.

Nagaland Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio and Union Home Minister Amit Shah had both expressed their condolences, with the Home Minister promising an investigation into the matter. However, the process of holding the Army personnel accountable faced legal and procedural hurdles, particularly due to the protections offered under AFSPA, which mandates prior sanction from the central government to prosecute military personnel for actions taken during official duties.

The Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court’s ruling emphasises that while the criminal proceedings may be halted, the Armed Forces themselves are not absolved from taking necessary disciplinary action. The court left room for further developments, depending on whether the central government grants permission for prosecution. This raises the possibility of internal military inquiries or other forms of accountability within the Armed Forces.

The apex court’s decision acknowledges the complexity of balancing national security concerns with human rights obligations, particularly in regions like Nagaland that are governed under AFSPA. The case adds to the ongoing debate over the application of the law in the northeast and whether reforms are necessary to prevent such incidents in the future.

Aftermath of the Incident

Following the deaths, the government had announced a high-level probe into the matter. The Nagaland government had also set up a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to look into the killings. However, despite these efforts, the case has seen little progress over the past two years, largely due to the legal protections surrounding the actions of military personnel in AFSPA areas.

Public opinion in Nagaland and the wider northeast region remains divided over AFSPA. Many view the law as essential for maintaining order in regions affected by insurgency, while others argue that it leads to excesses and human rights violations. The Supreme Court’s ruling is likely to reignite discussions on the future of AFSPA in the northeast and other conflict-affected areas.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s dismissal of the criminal proceedings against Army personnel involved in the 2021 Nagaland civilian deaths marks a pivotal moment in the case. While the court has left room for further action pending government sanction, it is clear that the incident has raised broader questions about the application of laws like AFSPA and the need for accountability in military operations.

As Nagaland continues to grapple with the tragedy, the focus will remain on how the Armed Forces handle the situation moving forward and whether legal reforms are implemented to prevent such incidents in the future.