Battle of Kodompokpi (1982)

On 25 September 1978 the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) was formed by dissolving the Revolutionary
Government of Manipur that took general amnesty from the Government in 971. The PLA became the armed
wing of the Revolutionary Peoples Front (RPF) that was formed after five months on 25 February 1979. It
carried out protracted guerrilla armed propaganda to create an independent and socialist Manipur. However, the
party military built up was too weak to maintain strategic defence vis--vis series of offensive operations that
were being carried out by the State. Several cadres were either killed or captured. The gravest defeat, which
have long lasting impact on collective memory, which have been continuously narrated in the form of a legend
and organisation of commemoration in the years after, was the Kodompoki battle of 13 April, 1982 where most
of the top leaders and important cadres were killed. 1 It is being said that since 1983 a memorial tomb was
constructed at Chingmeirong Cheiraoching in honour of the fallen cadres, where the parents, relative, friends
and other well-wishers had been performing floral tribute on 13 day of April every year. 2 Whether a cenotaph
was constructed in 1983 or afterwards could not be ascertained. However, it took some years to reorganise the
RPF and the first congress was held from May to July 1990. The congress adopted the political mass line of the
party; to promote lawful democratic activities of the women, students, youth and other civil society
organisations. It seems that decisions were also taken to construct cenotaphs of the fallen cadres or public
martyrs memorial complex, and encouragement of public to organise annual martyrs day on 13 April. In this
regards the propaganda objectives of the party as an organisational strategy, the interest of the families of the
fallen cadres and their relatives, and those who are sympathetic to the cause of rebellion were interplaying.
In the meanwhile, legend of the battle of Kodompokpi, which is believed to be based on the narratives of the
eyewitnesses, was spreading. It eulogised the selfless valour, heroic resistance, courage, and sacrifice of the
fallen cadres. According to the statement of the party, released in 2004, just 18 cadres of the PLA fought over
5000 of the Indian security personnel during the battle of Kodompokpi. 3 The cadres were taking shelter in a
house where they were surrounded from all circle by the government troops. They were outnumbered and
inferior in terms of arms. They did not surrender. They fought a war. They killed and injured hundreds of
Indian troops. But they were helpless due to lack of reinforcement and shortages of arms and ammunition.
They fought till the last moment when the house was set ablaze. One or two of the cadres escaped with severe
burns on their bodies. Some of then tried to resist the fire by hiding themselves inside the paddy in the kot4 and
by covering their heads with korfu5. They were burnt to ashes. They had happily accepted the torture and pain to
liberate the motherland. It is also being said that, after the PLA had suffered serious setbacks, the government
had announced that the PLA had been completely wiped out. The announcement seemed to have hurt the
sentiment of many Manipuri students in Delhi, most of whom were influenced by regular Maoist political
classes that were conducted in and around the University of Delhi. Some students responded by pasting banners
in support of PLA in the university walls and the Parliament Street. Some of them were on the run after they
were being charged by the police for attempted bomb blast in the Palika Bazaar. Some students from the Hindu
College and the Indian Institutes of Technology (Delhi), left their education and joined the party. This new
highly educated batch of cadres intensified the PLA propaganda by launching lighted paper balloons in the air
and wall banner campaigns. They were all killed in actions, except one or two renegades.

1 (a) Kodompokpi is a village, located at about 13 kilometre southwest from the capital Imphal. (b) Those killed were; (1)
Thoudam Kunjabihari alias Oja Raghy of Kakwa Nameirakpam Leikai, (2) Thoudam Loken alias Amujao of Kakwa Nameirakpam
Leikai, (3) Paka of Heirok, (4) Pakhanglakpa alias Puki of Keisampat, (5) RK Khoiromba alias Gyane of Moreh, (6) Sorokhaibam
Kameshwor alias Kanta of Heibongpokpi, (7) Khundrakpam Chaobhan of Kwakeithel Moirangpurel, (8) Naorem Rajen of Kakwa
Naorem Leikai and (9) Moirangthem Premkumar of Tera Sapam Leikai.

2 Synopsis to the W.P. (C) No. 228 of 2014 in the Imphal High Court.
3 RPF salutes its martyrs, Imphal: The Sangai Express, April 12, 2004.
4 A bamboo made paddy storage granary, which is normally kept in a room.
5 A thick and large sized pot type container normally made from Aluminum. It is being used for cooking, storing water, and other
purposes.

While the legend of the battle went under circulation; the mass political action of the RPF, as mentioned above,
seemed to have had direct or indirect influence over the beginning of mass observance of martyrs day on 13
April. A civil organisation rechristened as the Families Committee for Observation of April 13 (FCO) was
formed in 1990. It was an organisation of the families of the cadres who were killed in action. The objective of
the FCO is to openly organise the martyrs day at two different places at Kodompokpi, where the battle was
fought and on the foothill of the Cheiraoching Hill, 6 which become an attractive urban hiking range in the
subsequent years. The police were deployed to obstruct the observances. In the meanwhile, the FCO initiatives
went side by side with the unlawful floral tribute at the cenotaph on the Cheiraoching. They planted red paper
stars and offered floral tributes in the dark nights; only to be discovered and destroyed by the police in the
morning of 13 April. What became apparent in the following decade was the regular annual cycle of attempts by
the FCO to organise martyrs day, deployment of police on the hills to obstruct the programme and also to
prevent the PLA from constructing the cenotaph, construction of cenotaph and floral tribute at night, and the
destruction of the cenotaph by the police. The restrictions, obstructions, destructions, and confrontations at the
site of observances between the civilians and the police had generated a sense of humiliation to many.
Between 1998 and 2000, the Imphal District Magistrate issued Prohibitory Orders thereby restraining the
performance of the ceremony of floral tribute. Families of the fallen cadres approached the court praying for
allowing them to perform the ritual ceremony of floral tribute peacefully. The prayers were allowed. But the
venue of offering floral tribute was confined near the foothill of the Chieraoching. The police have completely
destroyed the cenotaph. In the meanwhile a civil organisations rechristened as the Manipur Martyrs Memorial
Committee was formed by a group of social workers, human right activists and representatives from various
clubs and other voluntary organizations. The site of the Martyrs Memorial Park was chosen at the spot where the
PLA had constructed cenotaphs and destroyed by the police. Four busts of the heroes of Manipur, viz. busts of
prince Koireng, general Thangal, major general Paona, and communist leader Irabot 7 were erected at the four
corners to have an explanation that the park was dedicated to those undisputed historical persons. A circular
platform was constructed in the middle, with a star mark, in honour of those unsung heroes who had sacrificed
their lives in the ' freedom struggle. The phrase freedom struggle have been used in an inclusive sense, but
vague in meaning, without actually identifying with any particular historical event and time. It is being said that
the Government neither allotted the land nor created any obstruction to it. According to a news report in 2000,
the government was fully aware of the construction of the memorial and provided assistance in the form of
power, water and construction of the pathway. If there were anything illegal behind the construction the security
forces would have intervened and prevented it. He (Advocate Mani) said in connection with the procurement of
land for the construction, necessary documents were sent to the authority concerned. However, the authorities
did not give any reply. Taking the Government silence as a nod it began construction work. the site is now
the property of the public and anybody can pay tributes at any time.8
Formal unveiling of the busts and opening of the park to the public was held on 9 April 2000. A speech
delivered at the programme and the news reporting of it, which were considered to be acts of sedition by the
government, and the subsequent police action in arresting the spokesperson and editor of the concerned
newspaper, had sparked off three weeks of public agitation in Manipur. According to the Sangai Express,
Iboyaima (an eighty four years old social worker, an advisor of All Manipur Clubs Organisation) told the
gathering that Manipur has a 2000 year old history. Manipur with its own distinctive language and border was a
sovereign nation, he added. Claiming that the UN charters endorse the ongoing liberation movement in Manipur,
Iboyaima expressed the confidence that the movement will bear fruit. The busts of the four heroes unveiled
today will instil a sense of patriotism among the younger generation (he used the word naharol, which literary
meant youth but can also meant insurgents), he added. In his presidential address Kh. Mani, who is also a wellknown lawyer said freedom is a birth right of an individual. It is far better to live at liberty for a few moments
than to live one hundred years under colonial shackles, Mani said. Mani said the memorial complex has been
constructed so that people can commemorate the martyrs at a particular place and day instead of organizing
functions and programmes at different places by different groups. 9 The police arrested Iboyaima and editor of
the newspaper Naharolgi Thoudang Mr. Biren on 14 April, under FIR no. 48 (IV) 2000 Lamphel PS U/S 121-

6 About 1.5 Kilometers from the capital city and now adjacent to the newly constructed Manipur State Assembly Secretariat.
7 (1) Prince Koireng and general Thangal were hanged by the British after the defeat in the Anglo-Manipur War of 1891, (2) Major
general Paona died in the battle of Khongjom in 1891, and (3) Communist leader Irabot was a reformer, fought against British
colonial rule and feudalism, carried out communist armed resistance between 1949-51, and died in the jungle in 1951.

8 Mani: Government Aware of Memorial Construction, Imphal: The Sangai Express, 12 April, 2000.

121 (A)-124 (A) IPC 13 (I) B-DA (P) Act. The arrest sparked off series of widespread protest by the journalist,
civil rights, and other organisations. There were general strikes and blockades. Many women were injured in the
pitch-battle with the police. The issues of defending human rights and the rights to self-determination of
Manipur, within the framework of the international conventions adopted by the United Nations, were the focus
of public meetings, campaigns and lectures. Finally both Iboyaima and Biren were released on 6 May after the
District and Session Judge, Manipur East Court had dismissed the charged sheet frame against them on the
grounds that the prosecution sanction was invalid and that there was no evidence to prove the charges. 10 The
unrest had contributed to the widespread propaganda about the Martyrs Memorial Park.
From 2001 onwards, the Families Committee for Observation of April 13 have been able to organise annual
martyrs day on a large scale by obtaining clearances from the High Court every year by the first week of April.
The concerned families had challenged the prohibitory orders on the ground that performance of ritual
ceremony of floral tribute was a religious-cultural custom and that the prohibitions had amounted to the
violation of Articles 19, 20 and 26 of the Constitution of India. 11 What might be interpreted as a political ritual
with both propaganda and organisation objectives, directed against the Indian State, have been construed as civil
and cultural rights within the constitutional framework. Every year between March and first week of April the
families sought the permission of the High Court. The High Court admitted the petitions and directed the
government to allow the petitioners, relatives, bonafide well-wishers and friends of the 9 (nine) persons to enter
the said place to perform ritual ceremony of floral tribute to the tombs of the said departed soul on 13.04.2012
after taking appropriate steps for maintenance of law and order in that area. It is made clear that in the name of
maintaining law and order, the respondents should not restrain the persons to enter the said place. 12 The legal
permission have been used as a propaganda means, usually on the eve of the martyrs day, through organising
press conferences, to attract participation to the observance. The idea of martyrdom and the emotional thrust of
honouring with floral tribute, seemed to have attracted many. Although April 13 remained a symbolic memory
of the fallen at the battle of Kodompokpi, the observance have become inclusive to encompass all those who
have been considered to be martyred before and after 1982. Therefore, the annual turn up, under the initiatives
of the civil society organisations have been considerably high. What became apparent, since 2001, have been the
change of the site of observance from the foothill to the memorial park, certain tendencies of obstruction by the
police and mass observance under the deployment the police and media coverage.
The lawful civil observances of the martyrs day were wedded to the propaganda of the RPF. The party
openly declared martyrs day 13 April. It construed the legend of the battle of Kodompokpi. It conveyed
solidarity to the people who were fighting to overcome the sufferings under the Indian system and assert for the
struggle to achieve national liberation and social emancipation. It appealed the people to attend the martyrs
day and not to organise or indulge in any entertainment programmes like cinema, drama, leela, musical
programmes or joint feasting. The outfit further appealed to the people to offer light to the departed souls of the
martyrs at every household in the night of April 13. 13 Media coverage of the martyrs day and the news
headline eulogised the RPF propaganda and its call. For instance, the Sangai Express in 2011 published a report
under the headline Fitting Floral Tributes Paid to Martyred PLA Leaders. It reported, amid tight security
measures, people in large number offered floral tribute to the departed souls of the proscribed People's
Liberation Army (PLA) at the Cheiraoching Martyrs Memorial Park. Offering of floral tribute began from the
early morning today and most of them comprised of family members, relatives and social activists. 14 There were

9 Four State Heroes Busts Unveiled, Imphal: The Sangai Express, 9 April 2000.
10 Iboyaima, Biren Set Free, Imphal: The Sangai Express, 6 May 2000.
11 Article 19 is meant to protect freedom of speech and expression, to assemble peaceably and without arms: Article 25 is meant
to protect freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion: Article 26 is meant to protect freedom to
manage.

12 Order, W.P. (C) No. 228 of 2014 in the Imphal High Court, 10 April 2014.
13 RPF's Martyr Day on Apr 13 Citizens Urged to Join Memorial Service, Imphal: The Sangai Express, 11 April 2011.
14 Fitting Floral Tributes Paid to Martyred PLA Leaders, Imphal: The Sangai Express, 13 April 2011.

also usual thanks giving statement by the party, to those who had attended the martyrs day. Gradually, over the
years, the observance of martyrs day was spread to other places where the party had been defeated in battles.
The government could not destroy the memorial park, because it had become a public property with busts of the
Manipur Heroes erected on the four corners. It could not completely prohibit the floral tribute as it was
organised lawfully by the public within the constitutional framework. It could neither obstruct the RPF from
appealing the people to do observe martyrs day nor delink the connection between the party and the martyrs
day. What becomes apparent is the unlawful party have been successful in tactically devising the lawful civil
agencies to make use of the domestic civil domain guaranteed by the State as the very launchpad of
commemorating martyrs day. There was merging of interest of the party, families of the fallen cadres, civil
societies and a large bulk of sympathisers. Any attempted obstruction by the government reduced the space and
time, that is, the memorial park and 13 April into an arena of conflict between the civil and the State. Such
conflict generated a sense of humiliation and injury, and contributed in construing a repressive or draconian
image of the State. At the same time, either partial or absolute success in organising the event becomes living
symbol of temporary triumph of the civil democratic assertion over the discredited repressive State. All these
contributed to the RPFs construction of the self in pain and the liberation propaganda.