Kohima: The Gauhati High Court Kohima Bench struck down four excommunication orders issued by the Yaongyimsen Riongsanger Putu Menden and the Yaongyimsen Senso Mungdang. Justice Yarenjungla Longkumer ruled on October 27 that these customary institutions cannot override constitutional protections of equality, liberty, and free movement. The court held that the institutions are amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 because their actions affect civil status, identity documents, and public benefits.
The dispute began over the establishment year of the Chumoukedima Yaongyimsen Union, with factions split between 1989 and 2001. After the Putu Menden dissolved the union on March 14, 2024, tensions escalated. The Putu Menden issued an order on April 4, 2024, excommunicating three petitioners and their children. By October 21, 2024, the Senso Mungdang announced the excommunication of 42 people, including 38 petitioners and their families, via an Ao language daily. A subsequent December 10, 2024, notice threatened permanent excommunication if the affected individuals did not return to the village within seven days.
Justice Longkumer stated, "Articles 29 and 371A could not protect excommunication and restrictions that violated fundamental rights." The court noted that these orders infringed upon Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. The ruling further distinguished the Putu Menden, an ancestral body, from the statutory Village Council established under the 1978 Nagaland Village and Area Councils Act. While the Village Council is subject to government removal powers, the Putu Menden operates based on generations-old traditions.
The court rejected arguments that these bodies were private and immune to review. It affirmed that when traditional institutions exercise public-law functions, they must comply with constitutional standards. The court did not settle the underlying dispute regarding the union’s formation date, leaving that for an appropriate forum. This decision builds on prior precedents like Mangyang Lima v. State of Nagaland, ensuring that customary bodies cannot escape judicial scrutiny when their actions impact individual rights.
Comments