President’s rule in Manipur has been extended for 6 months. After a proposal introduced in the Lok Sabha by Union Home Minister Amit Shah, the period of President’s rule in Manipur has been extended for another six months. In fact, after the resignation of the Chief Minister, the Central Government dissolved the State Assembly in February this year and President’s rule was imposed in Manipur.
The Central Government had imposed President’s rule in Manipur under Article 356 of the Constitution. President’s rule is imposed for 6 months and it can be extended every six months with the approval of Parliament, but it can be extended only for three years. Six months of President’s rule are being completed in Manipur on August 13. In such a situation, a proposal was brought to extend it further. President’s rule was imposed on February 13. This extension will come into effect from August 13, 2025.
It was said on behalf of the House that this House approves to keep in force the proclamation issued by the President on February 13, 2025 in respect of Manipur under Article 356 of the Constitution for an additional period of six months from August 13, 2025.
Why was President’s rule imposed?
Violence was seen in Manipur in the year 2023. In May 2023, ethnic conflict broke out between the Kuki and Meitei communities which turned violent. More than 260 people were killed in this conflict and thousands of people had to leave their homes and move to other places. After continuous efforts to control these situations, Manipur Chief Minister N Biren Singh resigned on 9 February 2025, after which on 13 February 2025, the Central Government decided to dissolve the State Assembly and President’s rule was imposed.
Demand for restoration of government
In the last Parliament session, Amit Shah had said that the move to impose President’s rule was taken because no one staked claim to lead the government after the resignation of N Biren Singh. However, since April, NDA MLAs, including N Biren Singh, MLAs close to him and those who dissent against him, have been demanding the restoration of a “popular” government, citing lack of support for President’s rule and insufficient progress towards restoring normalcy in the state.