# Smt. Aizawl Woman vs The State Of Mizoram And 7 Ors

HTML version: [https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2026-0090](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2026-0090)

## Report card

By judgment dated 27 August 2026 in WP(C)/12/2026, the Gauhati High Court (Aizawl Bench) (Coram: Rajesh Mazumdar, J.) adjudicated the matter concerning 2 police personnel, namely: Officer-in-Charge, Vaivakawn Police Station, Mizoram Police; Chief Public Relations Officer / Inspector General of Police (Hqrs), Mizoram Police Media Cell.

- Register number: MZ 01 CW 0003
- Case reference: WP(C)/12/2026
- Court and date: Gauhati High Court (Aizawl Bench) (Coram: Rajesh Mazumdar, J.), 27 August 2026
- Officer(s) at the material time: Officer-in-Charge, Vaivakawn Police Station, Mizoram Police; Chief Public Relations Officer / Inspector General of Police (Hqrs), Mizoram Police Media Cell
- Present service status: Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked: Section 326(g)/324(5)/191(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Section 129 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Article 226 Constitution of India of the Constitution of India
- Finding of the Court (extract): “The protocol laid down by the police manual was violated when disclosure beyond the permissible factors had been made.” (at para as reported on IndianKanoon doc/134279893)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum: Adverse finding.
- Present status of the proceedings: The judgment is recent and may be subject to appeal; the pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
- Source orders: [Judgment / order (primary source)](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/134279893/); [Permanent link to this record](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2026-0090)

**Record:** CW-2026-0090 (compiler id CWC-1375); case cop-mz-hc-0
**Title:** Smt. Aizawl Woman vs The State Of Mizoram And 7 Ors
**Court:** Gauhati High Court (Aizawl Bench); judges: Rajesh Mazumdar
**Case number / citation:** WP(C)/12/2026
**Judgment:** 2026-08-27 (2026, day precision)
**Incident date:** Not stated
**Place:** Aizawl, Mizoram; police station or unit: Vaivakawn Police Station; Mizoram Police Media Cell; force: state_police
**Category:** Other misconduct
**Sub-category:** dereliction evidence tampering
**Outcome:** Adverse finding (adverse_finding)
**Sections:** Section 326(g)/324(5)/191(2) BNS; Section 129 CrPC; Section 153A IPC; Article 226 Constitution of India
**Officers (gated display forms):** Officer-in-Charge, Vaivakawn Police Station, Mizoram Police; Chief Public Relations Officer / Inspector General of Police (Hqrs), Mizoram Police Media Cell (2 in record)
**Victims:** Aizawl woman (1 in record)
**Sentence / compensation:** None ordered

The High Court held that the Mizoram Police press release naming the petitioner's late husband as the central suspect violated the police media-briefing protocol. The High Court held that the release disclosed evidence theories, forensic details and investigative tactics beyond permissible limits. The High Court held that police personnel on the spot failed to maintain law and order when a mob stoned, torched and looted the petitioner's rented home. The High Court ordered recall of the press release, circulation of the briefing manual, supervised investigation of the mob attack, and assessment of the claimed property loss of Rs. 7,61,130 by a court-appointed assessor.

> The protocol laid down by the police manual was violated when disclosure beyond the permissible factors had been made.

**Sources (1):** [indiankanoon.org](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/134279893/)
**Verification:** V2 · Externally reported
**Review:** Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded
**admin category:** misconduct
**admin subcategory:** dereliction_evidence_tampering
**allegations:** {'category': 'Other', 'primary': True, 'position': 'Material fact supported', 'position_explainer': 'Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.', 'official_finding_relation': 'supports allegation'}
**anonymised:** False
**court quote para:** as reported on IndianKanoon doc/134279893
**display title redacted:** Smt. Aizawl Woman vs The State Of Mizoram And 7 Ors
**followup history:** {'date': '2026-09-24', 'scope': 'Swarm scout and independent verification pass (Muse Spark).'}
**followup status:** checked
**institutional response:** {'date': '2026-08-27', 'action_type': 'Order issued', 'status': 'Concluded', 'authority': 'Gauhati High Court (Aizawl Bench)', 'independence': 'External', 'legal_effect': 'Binding', 'description': 'The Gauhati High Court (Aizawl Bench) recorded adverse findings against police personnel.', 'disposition': 'adverse finding compensation', 'source': 'WP(C)/12/2026', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}
**last checked:** 2026-09-24
**link checked per url:** {'url': 'https://indiankanoon.org/doc/134279893/', 'link_checked': None}
**retracted:** {"is_retracted": false}
**service:** police
**source assessment:** {"established": null, "basis": null}
**status:** current
**subcategory display:** dereliction evidence tampering
**tier:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**tier badge:** Externally reported
**tier history:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**verdict:** accept
**verdict note:** Section 129 CrPC and Section 153A IPC are cited in the judgment, but the entry lists 'Section 129 BNS' and 'Section 153A BNS' — BNS codes are incorrect for these sections; the judgment uses CrPC/IPC references. It appears the modern BNS equivalent was substituted rather than the actual cited section.; The statute 'Section 129 BNS' does not exist in BNS (which has no Section 129); Section 129 CrPC is the correct citation used in the judgment.; Section 153A IPC is cited in the judgment, not 'Section 153A BNS'. While BNS replaced IPC, the judgment uses IPC numbering and the researcher should faithfully reproduce the sections as cited by the court.
**verification badge:** V2 · Externally reported
**verification status:** V2
**watch:** babuwatch

Status: Adverse finding.

[Open CW-2026-0090](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2026-0090)