Sak VA rubbishes Kuki claim
Source: The Sangai Express

Imphal, August 04 2025: The Sak (Leikhampokpi) Village Authority has flatly rejected the claim allegedly made by 'ill-informed Kuki refugees' that Sak (Leikhampokpi) village falls within the limits of Saitu.

Long before any invented claim by the Kuki refugees, Leikhampokpi was formally recorded and protected by the State, the Sak (Leikhampokpi) Village Authority said in a statement.

Manipur Gazette (Mao & Sadar Sub-Division) officially declared Leikhampokpi a Hill Area Village with its boundary on 25 January, 1962.As per the gazette notification, Leikhampokpi village extends up to Akonglok/Giudiky in the North, Thumkhonglok/Ariang giuky in the South, a stone erected marking the hill and valley (surveyed land) to the East and Koubru Chingyang to the West.

Moreover, there are many judicial orders including the Civil Court's judgement which affirmed Leikhampokpi village boundary, it said.

These records show that Leikhampokpi village stands on its own, unrelated to the 1946-47 Saitu Schedule, and prove Leikhampokpi is neither a part of Saitu nor an immigrant outpost, it asserted.

On the contrary, the Kuki groups now claiming 'our land' arrived under British direction.

Sepoy Villages Policy (1840s): British officer McCulloch admitted "new Kuki immigrants" were poured into the hill tracts and allotted land to serve as buffers.

Counter-Naga strategy: Later British reports confirmed Kukis were settled to counterbalance the more established Naga tribes.

Their (Kuki) presence began after 1830 for strategic reasons, not through any pre-colonial claim or tradition, the Leikhampokpi Village Authority asserted.

Leikhampokpi's (1955-65) recognitions and subsequent Court rulings remain legally binding.

Any attempt by the Kuki refugees who arrived under British patronage to redefine the village boundary is historically false, legally untenable and culturally offensive, it said.

The Leikhampokpi Village Authority further demanded that all concocted, self-invented Saitu-based claims against Leikhampokpi should be withdrawn and the authorities must honour the judicial orders (1955-65) and the 1962 gazette notification with regard to the Leikhampokpi village boundary.

Comment