Days before Mizoram marks the 40th anniversary of the signing of the historic Mizoram Peace Accord on June 30, the Mizoram Resource Mobilization Committee (MRMC) has renewed its push for the establishment of a separate High Court, describing it as an important step towards the full implementation of the landmark agreement that ended two decades of insurgency in the state.
The proposal was discussed during a meeting of the MRMC chaired by Chief Minister Lalduhoma on June 23. The committee noted that the creation of a separate High Court was among the provisions contemplated under the 1986 Peace Accord and said its establishment would strengthen access to justice while advancing the implementation of commitments made under the agreement. The committee also noted that the MRMC Sub-Committee on Administrative Reforms had already recommended the creation of a separate High Court on May 27, 2025.
According to the committee, discussions on the matter have previously been held with officials of the Law and Judicial Department. It was also noted that adequate land is available for the proposed institution.
The committee observed that a separate High Court would not only make access to justice more convenient for the people of Mizoram but could also reduce government expenditure in the long run.
The 40-year-old Peace Accord
The Mizoram Peace Accord, signed on June 30, 1986, between the Government of India and the Mizo National Front (MNF), is widely regarded as one of India’s most successful peace agreements. The accord brought an end to years of armed insurgency and paved the way for Mizoram’s transition to full statehood in 1987. As per the accord, the Government of India honored its commitment to grant Mizoram full statehood, with the state officially becoming India’s 23rd state on February 20, 1987.
Alongside statehood, Article 371G was inserted through the Constitution (Fifty-third Amendment) Act, 1986, providing special constitutional protections for Mizoram. This article safeguards the state’s unique cultural identity by ensuring that Acts of Parliament relating to religious or social practices, Mizo customary law, administration of civil and criminal justice according to Mizo customary law, and ownership and transfer of land do not apply to Mizoram unless the state legislative assembly approves them.
The accord was signed by then Mizoram Chief Secretary Lalkhama, Government of India Home Secretary R.D. Pradhan, and Mizo National Front leader Laldenga.
Unfulfilled promises from the Accord
However, there are a few critical provisions from the 1986 Peace Accord that remain unfulfilled. Most notably, while the accord stipulated that Mizoram would be entitled to have a High Court of its own if it so wished, the state continues to fall under the jurisdiction of the Gauhati High Court, which also serves Assam, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh. This has left Mizoram as one of only four states in India without a separate High Court, despite being a full-fledged state for nearly four decades. The delay is particularly conspicuous when compared to neighboring states like Meghalaya, Manipur and Tripura, which secured their own High Courts in 2013.
The issue of a separate High Court has surfaced periodically over the years. In July 2023, the Union Law Ministry informed Parliament that there was no proposal from either Mizoram or Arunachal Pradesh pending with the Centre for the establishment of separate High Courts.
Responding to a question raised in the Rajya Sabha by Senior Advocate and Member of Parliament P. Wilson, Minister of State for Law and Justice Arjun Ram Meghwal stated that the Gauhati High Court continues to serve as the common High Court for Assam, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram.
The ministry’s reply noted that Nagaland had conveyed a state cabinet decision taken on April 7, 2021, seeking the establishment of a separate High Court. It added that setting up separate High Courts in the northeastern region would require amendments to the North Eastern Areas (Reorganisation) Act, 1971, a matter under the Ministry of Home Affairs.
In contrast, Meghalaya, Manipur and Tripura were granted separate High Courts in 2013 after years of political advocacy, while Sikkim has had its own High Court since attaining statehood. Of India’s 28 states, 24 now have separate High Courts.
The establishment of the High Courts of Meghalaya, Manipur and Tripura in 2013 marked their separation from the Gauhati High Court, which had previously served all seven northeastern states.
Dear Reader,
Every day, our team at EastMojo travels through rain, rough roads, and remote hills to bring you stories that matter – stories from your town, your people, your Northeast.
We do this because we believe in truthful, independent journalism. No big corporate backing, no government pressure – just honest reporting by local journalists who live and breathe the same air you do.
But to keep doing this work, we need you. Your small contribution helps us pay our reporters fairly, reach places others ignore, and keep asking the tough questions.
If you believe the Northeast deserves its own fearless voice, stand with us.
Support independent journalism. Be a Member.
Thank you,
Karma Paljor
Editor-in-Chief, eastmojo.com
Speaking at the inauguration of the new High Courts in Meghalaya and Manipur, then Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir said the people of the Northeast had special laws and customs that needed to be integrated within the justice delivery system.
Addressing the inauguration in Imphal, Kabir said a separate High Court would bring legal remedies closer to the people and enable greater focus on state-specific issues and local challenges. He also said the new institutions would strengthen legal bodies such as state and district legal services authorities.
Also Read | Why is Mizoram’s student body raising concerns over foreign nationals during SIR?
You just read a story that took days to report. Help us keep our reporters on the ground in the Northeast.
Ad-free reading, support and keep important stories alive
Support once (any amount)
Scan to pay via UPI