Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/26/2026 of SHRI L. KIUMEHEAN (L. KUIMUHIAN) Vs THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 4 ORS on 31 May 2026
GAHC020001042026 2026:GAU-NL:318 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : WP(C)/26/2026 SHRI L. KIUMEHEAN (L. KUIMUHIAN) S/O LT. LONGKHANGBA, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF SANGPHUR VILLAGE, SHAMATOR, NAGALAND. VERSUS THE STATE OF
GAHC020001042026
2026:GAU-NL:318
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KOHIMA BENCH
Case No. : WP(C)/26/2026
SHRI L. KIUMEHEAN (L. KUIMUHIAN)
S/O LT. LONGKHANGBA, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF SANGPHUR
VILLAGE, SHAMATOR, NAGALAND.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 4 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND
SECRETARY/SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LAW AND JUSTICE, GOVT. OF NAGALAND, KOHIMA, NAGALAND.
2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
SHAMATOR
NAGALAND
3:THE DISTRICT DB'S CUSTOMARY COURT
SHAMATOR
NAGALAND
REPRESENTED BY THE HEAD DB.
4:TSUNTHRUBA
DB
S/O LT. ZUKIUMONG OF SANGPHUR VILLAGE
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
SHAMATOR
NAGALAND.
5:SHRI DOPING
GB
S/O SHIHTOBA
R/O SANGPHUR VILLAGE
SHAMATOR
NAGALAND
Advocate for the Petitioner : TONGPOK PONGENER, AKUM JAMIR,LAKNYEI
PHOM,ASENLA S LKR,VIKEHIENUO VIMERHA,KETI IMCHEN,OZUNGLILA,M.
DIVINA THERIE,HADASHA RUANGMEI
Advocate for the Respondent : GOVT ADV NL, BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
Advocates
For the petitioner
: Mr. Tongpok Pongener
For the respondents : Mr. K. Angami, Govt. Adv.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
01.06.2026 Mr. Tongpok Pongener, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that taking into account the scope of the present proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution the petitioner would be well advised to withdraw the instant proceedings with the liberty to approach this Court under the Rule 32 of the Rules of Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, if so advised.
2. The learned counsel further submitted that the withdrawal of the instant petition should not prejudice the petitioner.
3. This Court have perused the materials on record and taking into account the submissions, this Court closes the instant proceeding on withdrawal.
4. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach this Court in terms with Rule 32 of the Rules of Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, if so advised.
5. It is further observed that the withdrawal of the instant petition shall not prejudice the petitioner to again approach this Court in terms with the liberty so granted herein above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant