CW-1998-0009Imphal West, ManipurJudgment 31 March 1998

Iroishemba Woman vs State of Manipur and Others

The Gauhati High Court (Imphal Bench) allowed the writ petition of the widow of taxi driver [name withheld], killed on 14.08.1995 near the 5th Bn Manipur Rifles post at Iroishemba. Relying on a court-ordered ADM enquiry, the court found he died of bullet injuries fired by the Rifles personnel, who had fired about 83 rounds of.303 ammunition at his lone jeep after he allegedly failed to halt. It termed the firing indiscriminate and trigger-happy, held the killing a breach of fundamental rights for which the State was vicariously liable, and directed Rs 1.5 lakh compensation within three months, adjusting the Rs 20,000 ex gratia already paid. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

Externally reportedV2
What this record means

This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.

How verification works →

Report card

By judgment dated 31 March 1998 in Civil Rule No. 315 of 1996, the Gauhati High Court (Coram: H.K. Sema, J.) returned findings adverse to the Police personnel, 5th Battalion, Manipur Rifles, Iroishemba, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 1.5 lakh (Rs 1,50,000).

Register number
MN 01 CW 0001
Case reference
Civil Rule No. 315 of 1996 / AIR 1999 Gauhati 9; (1998) 3 Gau LR 123
Court and date
Gauhati High Court (Coram: H.K. Sema, J.), 31 March 1998
Officer(s) at the material time
Police personnel, 5th Battalion, Manipur Rifles, Iroishemba
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Article 21 of the Constitution of India; Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Finding of the Court (extract)
“It is shocking to notice that in order to stop a lone vehicle (Jeep) altogether about 83 rounds of .303 ammunition had been fired indiscriminately.” (at para 3)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: compensation only. Compensation: Rs 1.5 lakh (Rs 1,50,000).
Present status of the proceedings
No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.

Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.

The Gauhati High Court judgment dated 31 March 1998 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported

Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.

Official finding: supports allegation.

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“It is shocking to notice that in order to stop a lone vehicle (Jeep) altogether about 83 rounds of .303 ammunition had been fired indiscriminately.” (para 3)

Institutional response

1
31 Mar 1998

Order issued

Concluded
Gauhati High Court External · Binding

The Gauhati High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 150,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: AIR 1999 Gauhati 9; (1998) 3 Gau LR 123
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

1
19 Sep 2026

(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))

Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.

Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.

Keep exploring

These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.