Aman Kumar
The stage was set – literally – and on that stage, two local heroes of Manipur were about to be hanged.
The road was full – and on that road, two women were paraded naked.
In front of that stage, and on the roads leading to that stage, there was a vast throng of women.
On that road, besides the two women, there was a crowd of men.
All those women were begging for the lives of those two men to be spared.
All those men were shouting slogans and celebrating the parade and assault on those two women.
Introduction
About a month ago, India and the world was shocked to see two women being paraded naked after they were sexually assaulted. The video was from the North-Eastern state of Manipur. Though the video surfaced in July, it became clear that the incident was from May. It only made its way to the social media in July because of internet shutdown in Manipur till then. This makes me wonder how many crimes must have went unreported or unknown because of the internet shutdowns.
Once the video came to light, the politicians stepped in with their agendas, again using the victims of crimes as a tool. The opposition demanded answers from the Prime Minister (PM), ensured a (no-show) no confidence motion in the parliament. They made statements on the Manipur conflict and, asked questions from the government. And blew a kiss! Even if the kiss was directed at a fly on the wall, how could someone, who had asked for a debate on Manipur violence (which included the rape incident), blow a kiss in the middle of the discussion on the topic! The audacity! As I said, the victims are just a tool.
The PM referred to the incident in name only, mentioning Nehru and Indira Gandhi more than Manipur. If only the dead could speak! On his turn, the Home Minister gave a reply explaining the causes of the conflict as a spill over effect of the acts of the Junta government in Myanmar. But he soon went into the trope of whataboutery. He blamed the opposition for not informing the government about the video on time – as if the security apparatus of the state and the country is under the control of the opposition and not the Home Minister himself! Did he mean to say that without the video, the crime would not have even been reported or recorded and the state would have walked away from any responsibility of maintaining law and order?
But apart from the political hullabaloo, when I read about the video I was reminded of an incident from Manipur. The one where women of Manipur came out in support of their own men. The incident dates back to an era when Manipur was not a part of India. In fact, it was not even a princely state and hence not even a part of the British India. The incident is the 1891 trial of Prince Bir Tikendrajit Singh. The day of the trial and what women did then perfectly contrasts with this incident of May.
Trial of Tikendrajit Singh
The Kingdom of Manipur shared borders with modern-day Myanmar which was then known as Burma. Due to constant attacks from Burmese king, the king of Manipur constantly sought help from British forces, who were of course interested in Burma. Returning the favour, the Manipur kingdom helped the British in taking control over Burma. However, very soon, the British aimed their guns on Manipur too. This was in the aftermath of the death of King Chandra Kirti Singh of Manipur in 1886. As had been the story thus far, the British has of policy of steeping in at time of succession and imposing their wishes on the local rules all throughout (modern-day looking) India. They followed the same pattern in 1886 too. This time with Manipur.
Upon the death of King Chandra Kirti Singh, Sur Chandra Singh (his son from his first wife), occupied the throne. All his challengers were either killed or defeated. But in 1890, two of his brothers were killed which made Sur Chandra Singh fearful of his life. He fled the palace and declared that he had no intention of claiming it back. This is where Tikendrajit Singh comes into the story. When Sur Chandra Singh fled, the throne was occupied by Kula Chandra, but the actual power was exercised by his brother (from a different mother – the third wife of king Chandra Kirti Singh) Tikendrajit Singh. The British decided to fight against Tikendrajit when the palace guards rebuffed an armed attack by some British soldiers. A war ensued. Tikendrajit was 35 at the time and despite his heroic efforts, he lost the war of 1891 to the British. He was subsequently charged with waging war against the Queen, and for abetment to murder.
Monomohun Ghose, a barrister, argued that by trying Tikendrajit, ‘the government of India was simply exercising the rights of conquering sovereign force, for the purpose of bringing to justice persons accused of committing grave offences, but who, not being British subjects, are not triable by British courts, and are not governed by municipal laws of British India’.
Tikendrajit was tried under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) whose territorial jurisdiction extended to British India. At the time of the commission of the alleged offences, Manipur was not a part of British India. Hence, the application of the IPC was illegal. Referring to Ghose’s memorandum on the trial, Caroline Keen writes that ‘Ghose maintained that under the Indian Penal Code only subjects of the Queen or foreigners residing in British India could be guilty of waging war against the Queen. Manipur was an independent sovereign state and, Ghose stressed, its sovereignty had been recognised by the Chief Commissioner when he sent his political agent into the palace on 23 March to request the Regent to hand over Tikendrajit.’ But the trial did happen and Tikendrajit was awarded the death sentence.
Upon his conviction, Tikendrajit was brought in a public area to be hanged. He walked up the scaffold with no sign of emotion and his face was resolute and firm. At the place of hanging, a large crowd of women had gathered. Based on the then local Manipuri custom, if a substantial number of women come out in support of the accused who was awarded the death sentence, then the sentence used to be commuted. About five thousand women gathered on that day. They held the edges of their innafi (scarf) spread in front, which symbolises them seeking pardon for Tikendrajit. Nothing could however deter the British monarchy that day from their brazen lust for territory and sovereignty. A young prince who had captured the throne in a way which was very common to the local ways was deposed and hanged before his own people, by a foreign, power-hungry colonial empire, in a public setting. One wonders what would have happened if the power hungry Britishers would not have hanged Tikendrajit on that fateful day.
Conclusion
At the time of writing, the people of Manipur are on the streets, protesting regarding the affirmative action policies of the Indian government. On 4 May, the H’ble Governor of Manipur issued a ‘shoot at sight’ order. The video which came to light in July is also from the same date. I don’t know if the incident prompted the order or if the incident unfolded despite the order. I hope it’s the former.
But I doubt it is. That’s because the Home Minister told in the parliament that he only got to know of the incident, like all of us, in July. So it’s safe to assume that in a bottom up chain of command, the police didn’t know, the governor didn’t know and hence the home minister didn’t know. So the incident couldn’t have prompted the order. Saying otherwise might mean that the HM lied in the parliament.
Which brings us to the uncomfortable reality – that the parade was allowed/ignored in clear violation of the order. Either way, this is a sad and unfortunate story and total failure of the state machinery.
I hope the next time the Chief Minister or any state official or any resident of state of Manipur visits the Manipur House, located on the Bir Tikendrajit Marg in Chanakyapuri, New Delhi, they will think for a moment about who Tikendrajit was and what the women of Manipur did to save his life.
(This piece is partly taken from my upcoming book chapter on trials of Bahadur Shah Zafar and Tikendrajit Singh.)
Discover more from Indian Blog of International Law
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
Indian Blog of International Law 