DIMAPUR, AUG 19 (NPN) | Publish Date: 8/19/2021 12:56:21 PM IST
In the wake of tension in Tizit sub-division, Mon district over boundary dispute, the Mon district administration has ordered promulgation of the prohibitory order U/S 144 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for maintaining public safety and peace and tranquility in the sub-division.
In an order, the additional deputy commissioner (ADC) Tizit, Pakon Phom, stated that a land dispute between Jaboka and Yannu village over Konhoa Area occurred on August 18, 2021 resulting in damaged to paddy fields, burning of shacks, huts and cutting down of plantation crops and trees.
ADC stated that there were sufficient grounds for promulgation of the prohibitory order.
As per the ordered, gathering of more than five persons at a time in public or private places was prohibited. Besides the movement of public, all vehicular movement of non-essential nature including passenger vehicles has also been prohibited.
The order would however be exempted in respect of district administration, police, para military forces, magistrate on duty, doctors and medical staff and persons engaged in emergency services.
In addition, all movement of essential commodity would be exempted. The order would come into force with effect from 6am of August 19, 2021 and remain in force till further orders.
ADC cautioned that anyone violating the order would be liable for punishment under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code. Scheduled of the areas: 2Km stretch from Loakho village junction to Longting village.
Yansa village refutes reports
Reacting to several reports on that it had destroyed plantations and properties at Yannu village on Wednesday, Yansa (Jaboka) village in a clarification asserted that they acted only against the alleged illegal encroachment and did not disturb the peaceful environment.
In a joint statement, chief Angh of Yanyen Shomwang Jongwang and Yansa Wanghoa customary court secretary M Thakngam Wangyin said Yansa village, which has 11 feeder villages under it, and Yannu village had been in a good relationship even before India’s Independence in 1947.
They claimed that it was due to Yansa’s pivotal role that Yannu was re-established in 1957 after it had come under severe backlashes and was on the verge of collapse.
They said, out of gratitude to Yansa, “Yannu village agreed in principle to live and be governed by Yansa thenceforth”.
However, over the years, they alleged that Yannu village began to “exaggerate a lot” and the loyalty was broken and an attempt was made to disassociate with Yansa, that created a crack in the long cordial relationship between the two villages.
Thereafter, adding fuel to the fire, they alleged that Yannu started to encroach on lands at two locations– Konhoa and Thamnu – that were “undisputed ancestral lands” of Yansa. Despite being warned of such encroachment on several occasion from carrying out any form of illegal activities like cultivation, plantation, etc., they said that their plea fell on deaf ears
They sad claimed that Yansa Wanghoa Court (apex customary court) also sent letters of invitation to Yannu village for a joint sitting eight times. “But they chose to ignore our call for peace” and instead continued to allegedly encroach. “At the behest of Yannu village, even a section of NAP outpost was deployed at the site,” they added.
In the light of the above, they said Yansa village had no other option but to resort to protest against the illegal encroachment of land by Yannu. Hence, a handful of people from Yansa had on August 18 marched towards the encroached land area to carry out eviction.
They claimed that during the course of action, not a single person from Yansa had intruded an inch into Yannu village nor harmed any livestock or disturbed the peaceful environment.
“There was no such attack on the lives of villagers of Yannu as claimed and made viral by some sections of people in social media and local newspapers. These are false allegations made upon Yansa by vested individuals to garner support and sympathy. We have gone there solely to defend our ancestral land and not to wage war against Yannu,” the duo clarified.
They said Yanwanghoa believed in peaceful solution and still welcomed Yannu to amicably settle the issue.