New Delhi [India], August 5 : Parliament on Tuesday adopted the statutory resolution to extend President's Rule in Manipur for six more months.
The resolution was adopted in the Rajya Sabha on Tuesday and Lok Sabha last week.
The resolution in the Upper House was moved by Union Minister of State for Home Affairs Nityanand Rai amid sloganeering by the opposition.
The house adopted the statutory resolution, which stated that President's Rule will be extended for six months with effect from August 13, 2025.
While there was a brief debate in Lok Sabha over the resolution, Rajya Sabha witnessed noisy scenes over the opposition's demand for debate on the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in poll-bound Bihar. Opposition parties have been raising the demand since the start of the monsoon session of Parliament.
President's rule was imposed in Manipur on February 13, days after N Biren Singh resigned from the Chief Minister's position.
President Droupadi Murmu imposed President's rule in Manipur in February after receiving a report from the state governor. N Biren Singh resigned as Chief Minister amid violence and political instability that had plagued the state for nearly two years.
The imposition of the President's rule can last up to six months, subject to parliamentary approval. During this period, the central government oversees governance. Fresh elections may also be called to elect a new assembly.
Ethnic violence had erupted in Manipur in May 2023. Replying to the debate on the motion to impose President's Rule in Manipur in April this year, Home Minister Amit Shah said that the ethnic violence between the tribal and non-tribal communities in Manipur began due to a decision by the High Court.
He said that this violence was neither a failure of the government nor terrorism or religious conflict, but rather ethnic violence arising from the sense of insecurity spread between two communities due to the interpretation of the High Court's decision. He mentioned that the very next day, the Supreme Court stayed the order because it was deemed unconstitutional.