Click the Play button to listen to article

The Gauhati High Court has held that a Mizoram Police press release issued during an ongoing murder investigation violated the prescribed media briefing protocol by disclosing evidence theories, forensic details and investigative tactics and divulged details which were prohibited. 

Justice Rajesh Mazumdar observed that the disclosure “admittedly and obviously led to public outrage and mob violence” against the family of the suspected accused.

The observation came in a plea moved by a woman challenging an eviction notice issued by members of the Young Mizo Association, Tanhril Branch, Mizo Upa Pawl, Tanhril Branch and Mizo Hmeichhe Insuihkhawm Pawl, Tanhril Branch.

She was also aggrieved by the alleged inaction of the State-respondents against mob action in which her property was damaged and her family was threatened, and had challenged the Mizoram Police press statement issued on the same date.

The case arose after the body of a young girl, who had gone missing in December, 2025, was found near the MZU Football Playground. The petitioner's husband subsequently died after falling from the first floor of their home. The authorities investigating the unnatural death of the girl suspected the petitioner's husband to be involved in her death and thereafter concentrated the investigation on his home and vehicle and the police had issued a press statement in that regard. 

The court held:

"In the present case, the press release had been issued when the investigation was ongoing and, therefore, the provisions of clause 8.3 of chapter 8 of the police manual, which came into operation as aforesaid, were required to have been kept in view. To the contrary, the Mizoram police press statement had disclosed not only the identity of the victim but had also referred to the call detail records, disclosing the mobile phone SIM numbers of the victim. It also disclosed the manner in which the body of the victim had been recovered and the stage of decomposition, etc.
The press release further revealed that the victim was pregnant, that the identity of the father was unknown and that the victim had intended to marry a prospective groom who was an elderly pensioner. The press release further stated that the husband of the petitioner herein was one of the prime suspects. It was further revealed in the press report that suspected bloodstains were found in the vehicle. The manner of analysis of the victim's phone and its correlation with the phone of the deceased husband of the petitioner had also been stated in detail. The nature of the bodily remains which were recovered, including the bone and the tooth, was also disclosed. The contents of the forensic report confirming the matching of the blood of the victim and the other details were also divulged. The protocol laid down by the police manual was violated when disclosure beyond the permissible factors had been made. The police press release had disclosed evidence theories, forensic details and investigative tactics"

Background

On January 27, 2026, the Mizoram Police issued a press statement stating, among other things, that the deceased girl was pregnant, suspected blood stains had been found inside the vehicle, and cervical vertebrae and eight teeth suspected to belong to her had been recovered and sent for forensic examination. The press release further stated that the forensic examination confirmed that the blood stains found inside the vehicle matched the deceased girl's blood and identified the petitioner's husband as the principal accused responsible for her murder.

On the same day, the Presidents of the three Associations issued an eviction notice stating that the family of the main culprit would no longer be allowed to reside within the jurisdiction of the Tanhril Local Council. Around the same time, a large mob gathered at the petitioner's residence, resorted to stone-pelting, burnt the house and construction materials and vandalised and looted valuables from the property.

The petitioner contended that the press release amounted to a public declaration of guilt against her deceased husband without any trial, judicial finding or conviction and that it violated the Police Manual for Media Briefing.

The State authorities, however, maintained that the press statement was an official public document relating to a “high-profile” murder investigation and that disclosure of the identity of a suspect was a standard practice to prevent rumours and update the community. They further stated that an FIR had been registered regarding the mob violence and that although several persons had been identified, arrests could not be made due to the volatile situation.

Findings

The High Court noted that none of the respondents disputed the contents of the press release or eviction notices, the mob violence and the destruction of the petitioner's private property which followed as an aftermath of the public disclosure made by the police authorities.

The Court found that the press release had been issued while the investigation was ongoing and, therefore, Clause 8.3 of Chapter 8 of the Police Manual was required to have been kept in view.

The Court further noted the “immediate impact” of the press release.

“This disclosure had admittedly and obviously led to public outrage and mob violence.”

It recorded that the personal property of the petitioner and her family, including construction materials and her daughter's scooter, had been set ablaze and that the petitioner and her family had to leave the household premises where they were staying on rent.

The Court also noted, “The irony we notice in this case is that the respondents, in their affidavit, have tried to justify the failure to afford protection to the property of the petitioner and her family by stating that the police personnel were heavily outnumbered; however, no indication has been given as to the steps which were initiated or attempted to be taken for affording protection.”

The High Court also found that although an FIR had been lodged regarding the vandalism and mob violence and some perpetrators had been identified, the authorities had expressed helplessness in arresting them.

It further noted, “The fact that the law-enforcing agencies have expressed their failure to maintain law and order in the face of an angry mob is, to say the least, most unfortunate.”

The court thus issued the following directions:

  • The Press Release was declared as violating protocol laid down in the Police Manual for media briefing. The authority who had issued the press release was directed to recall it forthwith within 7 days.
  • The respondent no.1 (State Govt) shall circulate “Police Manual for Media Briefing” to the offices of the respondents nos. 2 (Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram) and 3(Inspector General of Police) forthwith, and the respondents nos. 2 and 3 shall have the same circulated to all police stations.
  • The IO in the FIR lodged over "mob violence" shall act in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court. The jurisdictional Superintendent of Police shall monitor the progress of the case on a weekly basis and any delay, negligence or lapses in the investigation/prosecution would be dealt with in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court.
  • Additional District and Sessions Judge, Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl, Lalngaihmawia Zote was appointed as the Claims Commissioner as per the guidelines of the  Supreme Court. The Claims Commissioner shall be at liberty to suggest the necessity of appointment of an Assessor to assist him and may also suggest the name of such assessor. The Claims Commissioner shall process the claim for compensation and forward his recommendations to the court's Registry  within  3 months.

The matter was listed on December 4.

Case Title: Smt. C. Laltanpuii v. State of Mizoram & Ors.

Case No.: WP(C) No. 12/2026

Click Here To Read the Order

Tags: