Dimapur’s Permit Regime Tears Through Tribal Lifelines

Dimapur, the former capital of the Dimasa Kachari kingdom in ancient days, has existed all these years as a melting pot of culture, kinship, and coexistence. It now resides at the center of an escalating constitutional and cultural war.

Academic Dr. Uttam Bathari of Gauhati University has moved a Public Interest Litigation (PIL No. 29/2025) in the Gauhati High Court questioning the recent expansion of the Inner Line Permit (ILP) regime to Dimapur, Chümoukedima, and Niuland districts of Nagaland.

Bathari is accompanied in the petition by West Karbi Anglong's Kangthim Ronghang and Diphu in Karbi Anglong's Sarklim Bey in representing the interest of the larger Dimasa and Karbi tribal community.

Gauhati High Court Admits the PIL

The case came up for hearing on June 26, 2025, before a Division Bench consisting of Acting Chief Justice Lanusungkum Jamir and Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair, who accepted the PIL and issued notices to the Union of India, the State of Assam, and the State of Nagaland.

Although formal notice was dispensed with since all the respondents were present, the petitioners were ordered to file extra copies of the writ. The case has been fixed for a second hearing after six weeks, in tandem with an allied case (PIL No. 22/2025).

"Tribal Way of Life Is Being Disrupted"

In conversation with Pratidin Time, Dr. Uttam Bathari stated: The Inner Line Permit used to be restricted to particular zones of Nagaland, but now the whole Dimapur area, including Chümoukedima and Niuland, has been brought within its purview. This is having serious consequences for original inhabitants who have long resided and moved freely within this territory."

He added: "Thousands of Karbi and Dimasa people commute back and forth between Assam and these places every day for spiritual rituals, cultural events, and clan rituals. ILP restrictions are now cutting across our ancient customs and breaking our heritage."

Bathari underlined that the ILP was a colonial invention to control outsiders' movement and not to limit indigenous people.

"This legislation is now being misused. Tribal people such as the Dimasas and Karbis need to be exempted from such curbs. The ILP in its existing form is an obstacle to our identity and against our constitutional rights."

He assured that the Gauhati High Court has directed notices to both the Government of Nagaland and the Union Ministry of Home Affairs, requesting them to respond to the concerns of the petition against the blanket application of ILP.

The PIL challenges government notifications dated September 20, 2024, and May 29, 2025, which duly extended the ILP to the area. It contends that this action has profoundly impacted the intermeshed lives of Dimasa and Karbi tribes, whose social and cultural life crisscrosses both Assam and Nagaland.

The Karbi and Dimasa communities have historically resided in adjoining regions in Dima Hasao, Karbi Anglong, and West Karbi Anglong in Assam, and Dimapur, Chümoukedima, and Niuland in Nagaland. These clan-based societies need periodic movement over the state boundary for birth, marriage, funeral, and community ceremonies.

With ILP in place, these encounters now need permits, making everyday cultural interactions bureaucratic barriers. The petition contends that this is to introduce an artificial separation that disrupts the continuum of tribal heritage and identity.

"City by the Great River" Now Behind Check Posts

Dimapur, whose name has its genesis in the Dimasa terms "Di" (river), "Ma" (great), and "Pur" (city), has historically been regarded as the "City by the Great River" — symbolic and geographical connection between tribal communities on opposite sides of the state border.

The petitioners contend that the ILP, a vestige of colonial policies, is now being utilized against the very same people it was originally intended to safeguard. Rather than maintaining tribal integrity, it is isolating them from their native land.

The PIL claims that the application of ILP to indigenous populations infringes on several fundamental rights guaranteed under the Indian Constitution:

Article 14 – Right of Equality

Article 15 – Protection against Discrimination

Article 19(1)(d) – Freedom of Movement

Article 21 – Right to Life and Personal Liberty

The petition affirms that by curtailing the cultural and communal existence of tribal individuals, the ILP regime is violating their dignity, autonomy, and heritage.

Attorney for the respondents before the Court were Deputy Solicitor General R.K.D. Choudhury (for the Union of India), R.K. Bora (for the State of Assam), and T. Khro, Additional Advocate General (for the State of Nagaland).

ALSO READ: 1,300 Fake ILPs Seized: Has the Permit System Been Compromised?