Senapati, August 4: The Sak (Leikhampokpi) Village Authority has issued a firm rebuttal against what it calls an ill-informed land ownership claim by Kuki refugees regarding the village of Saitu. The Authority stated that Leikhampokpi has long been recognized by the state, both legally and historically, as a separate and independent village.
According to the Authority, Leikhampokpi was officially recorded and protected as a hill area village with its own boundary in the Manipur Gazette on 25 January 1962 (Sl. No. 185, Mao & Sadar Sub-Division). The gazette defined its boundaries as Akonglok/Giudiky to the north, Thumkhonglok/Ariang Giuky to the south, Koubru Chingyang/Koubru Loungriang Nai Phangiuky to the west, and a stone marker separating hill and valley areas to the east. This official notification, they said, clearly establishes Leikhampokpi’s status independent of what they describe as a fabricated narrative connecting the village to Saitu.
Also read Data Collection of Non-local, Non-indigenous Residents Commences in Senapati
The Authority cited multiple judicial orders between 1955 and 1965 that confirmed Leikhampokpi’s boundaries. On 3 February 1955, the Deputy Commissioner of Manipur, V.S. Sundaram, gave the first judicial recognition in Hill Misc. Case No. 6 of 1954. This was followed by a ruling on 21 September 1956 by the EAC (Hills), under the Assam High Court, Imphal Bench, in Misc. Case No. 13 of 1956, reaffirming the boundary. On 20 April 1965, the Forest Settlement Officer also re-confirmed the village limits in response to objections over forest boundaries (K.K. Reserve Objection Petition No. 5 of 1964).
The Village Authority further noted a civil court judgment dated 30 April 1974, in which the Munsiff Court, Imphal West, ruled in favour of Leikhampokpi in a case of encroachment by Molnoi villagers on scheduled land (O.S. No. 4/71/33/73/2/74/6/74). The verdict was later upheld by the Additional District Judge, Manipur.
Restating its boundary claims, the Authority said that the EAC (Hill) Misc. Case No. 13 of 1956 described Leikhampokpi’s limits using the same north, south, east, and west references found in the gazette. They emphasized that the village’s boundary is distinct from and unrelated to the 1946–47 Saitu schedule, and therefore not part of any such claim.
Also read Accused in Jiribam Killings Case Have No Criminal Background, Release Them Immediately: Hmar Bodies
The statement pointed to colonial-era documentation that the Kuki groups now making land claims were settled in the region under British direction. It cited British Resident McCulloch’s account that new Kuki immigrants were brought into the hill tracts and given land under the Sepoy Villages policy of the 1840s. These settlements, the Authority said, were intended to serve as buffers and to counterbalance more established Naga tribes, beginning only after 1830 and not based on traditional or ancestral ownership.
In contrast, Leikhampokpi’s people assert that they have lived on the land for centuries. They trace their lineage to Apou Tingkubou Chawangtingduirimai, founder of Sakmai (also known as Lungtoupokpi), who left Makuilongdi to establish a settlement that covered areas including present-day Motbung and Saparmeina with over 1,000 households. Ancestral figures like Tingkubou, Manalangbou, Pousungbou, Pousabou, and Charengthui are remembered as warriors who defended the land during key historical events.
The Authority cited participation in battles dating back to 568 AD against Meetei King Ura Konthouba, and in 1819 during the Chahi Taret Khuntakpa against the Burmese, as recorded in the Cheitharol Kumbaba.
Also read Framework Agreement: 10 Years On, ANSAM, UNC Raise Concerns Over Delay in Indo-Naga Political Issue
Cultural evidence cited includes a megalith known as Manalangpe Tusom, erected in memory of Manalangbou’s grandmother and now located at the CRPF camp near present-day Sakmai Leikhampokpi village. Another me galith, marking the site of a traditional salt spring used by local villages, was rediscovered on 12 July 2022. A third megalith, erected by Piulinbou, stands at the original, now uninhabited, ancestral village site.
The statement also detailed the origin of the Zeliangrong people, who share ancestral roots in Makhel, a place symbolized by the wild pear tree (Tei-Bei), marking a covenant of peace made before dispersal. The Zeliangrong people’s journey from Makhel to Makuilongdi involved 7,777 households, where the Zeme, Liangmai, and Rongmei lived as a unified community before branching out. Sakmai, now known as Leikhampokpi, is one of the major settlements founded by the Liangmai following this migration. According to tradition, Apou Tingkubou, regarded as the first chief, established the village of Sakmai, which later became a cultural and spiritual stronghold preserving customary law, clan identity, and traditional governance.
Also read Accused in Jiribam Killings Case Have No Criminal Background, Release Them Immediately: Hmar Bodies
The Authority said that after dispersal from Makuilongdi, the people of Sakmai lived in peace for generations, cultivating the valley and hills, conserving the forest, and maintaining cordial relations with the Meetei kings until tensions led to conflict in 568 AD.
Concluding the statement, the Sak (Leikhampokpi) Village Authority called for the immediate withdrawal of all “concocted and self-invented” Saitu-based land claims against the village. It demanded that the judicial orders from 1955 to 1965 and the 1962 gazette notification be fully honoured by all relevant authorities, including during updates to maps, revenue records, and forest notifications.