# AFSPA Explained: Disturbed Areas, Supreme Court Safeguards and the October 2026 Extension

By Shivam Singh, Founder & Mentor, Minimalist IAS · Published 26 Sept 2026 · Updated 14 Oct 2026
Source: https://www.minimalistias.com/blog/afspa-extension-manipur-nagaland-arunachal

> AFSPA in one page: who declares a disturbed area, what the armed forces can do, the Supreme Court safeguards, the reform debate and where it applies after the October 2026 extension, with a process graphic, a timeline, MCQs and Mains questions.

**AFSPA is a law that gives the armed forces special powers in a ‘disturbed area’ and shields them from prosecution without the Union government’s sanction; the Home Ministry has now extended it for six months in parts of Manipur, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh.** Think of it as a zone order: extra powers apply only inside the notified line, and they lapse unless the notice is renewed.

> **Why in news:** The Home Ministry extended the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 for six months from 1 October 2026 in parts of Manipur, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh, on a review of the law and order situation.

**Updated (October 2026):** the extension’s areas are re-checked against a second report; sections are reordered, and a worked example, Prelims traps and a 60-second revision are added.

## Where does AFSPA apply now?

The renewed notice is narrower than the law’s reach on paper, so the first step is to know exactly what it covers.

| State | Where AFSPA applies (1 October 2026 to 31 March 2027) |
| --- | --- |
| Manipur | Whole State except areas under 13 police stations in five valley districts: Imphal West, Imphal East, Thoubal, Bishnupur, Kakching |
| Nagaland | Nine districts (Dimapur, Niuland, Chümoukedima, Mon, Kiphire, Noklak, Phek, Peren, Meluri) plus areas under 21 police stations in Kohima, Mokokchung, Longleng, Wokha and Zunheboto |
| Arunachal Pradesh | Tirap, Changlang and Longding districts, plus Namsai, Mahadevpur and Chowkham police-station areas in Namsai district (bordering Assam) |

- **Period:** six months, unless withdrawn earlier; the Act is renewed in six-month rounds.
- **Nagaland:** the list matches the previous round, as reported, and is far smaller than before the 2022 cut.
- **Manipur:** the exempt valley police stations stay exempt; the hill districts remain covered.

## What does AFSPA allow?

A renewal matters because of what the notice switches on inside the line. **One line:** once an area is declared ‘disturbed’, soldiers can use force, arrest and search without a warrant, and cannot be sued or prosecuted without the Centre’s sanction.

- **Who declares:** the Governor of the State, the Administrator of a Union Territory or the Central Government, by Gazette notice for the whole or part of the area (Section 3). The Centre gained this power in 1972.
- **Use of force (Section 4):** after due warning, force even causing death against anyone breaking an order that bans assembly of five or more persons or carrying weapons.
- **Arrest and search:** arrest without warrant for cognizable offences; enter and search without warrant; destroy arms dumps and hideouts.
- **Hand-over:** arrested persons go to the nearest police station with the least possible delay.
- **Protection (Section 6):** no prosecution or suit against personnel for acts under the Act without the Centre’s prior sanction.

*Figure: The AFSPA chain in six steps: declaration of a disturbed area by the Governor, Administrator or Centre; special powers for the armed forces; arrested persons handed to the nearest police station; no prosecution without the Centre’s sanction; review before six months end; extend, narrow or withdraw.*

## AFSPA vs ordinary law

These powers are easiest to grasp by setting them against the normal policing rules they replace inside a disturbed area.

| Point | AFSPA (in a disturbed area) | Ordinary law (police and BNSS) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Trigger | A ‘disturbed area’ notice | No notice needed |
| Who acts | Armed forces officers on their own judgment | Police; armed forces only when a magistrate calls them to disperse an assembly |
| Use of force | Can extend to causing death, after due warning | Minimum force needed to disperse or arrest |
| Search | Enter and search without a warrant | Normally on a warrant or on specified grounds |
| Prosecution | Centre’s prior sanction | Sanction of the appropriate government for official acts |
| Duration | Notified in limited, reviewable periods | Permanent law |

**Remember it as:** the notice, the warning, the minimum force, the hand-over, the sanction. Every Supreme Court safeguard attaches to one of these five.

## What the Supreme Court has said

Because those five links are where abuse can enter, the Court has fenced each one.

- **Naga People’s Movement of Human Rights v Union of India (1997):** a five-judge Bench upheld AFSPA. It held that force must be the minimum necessary, a declaration must be time-limited and reviewed before six months end, and the Army’s Do’s and Don’ts must be followed.
- **Sanction needs reasons:** the Centre’s decision to grant or refuse sanction is subject to judicial review, so it must give reasons.
- **Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association v Union of India (2016):** excessive or retaliatory force is not allowed even in a disturbed area, and there is no blanket immunity for unjustified deaths.
- **Hegde Commission (2013):** appointed by the Court, it examined six Manipur cases and found none was a genuine encounter.

## Worked example: four questions for any operation

The safeguards become a checklist you can apply to any case in an answer.

1. **Is the area notified?** The order must be in force on the day.
2. **Was due warning given?** Firing without warning breaks Section 4.
3. **Was the force minimum?** Retaliation is not self-defence (2016).
4. **Were arrested persons handed to police promptly?** Delay breaks the hand-over rule.

A death that fails any of these four tests leads to an inquiry, and the sanction decision then comes before the Centre.

## Why is AFSPA debated?

Those tests exist because the law sits between two real needs: security in insurgency areas and the rights of residents.

- **Security case:** forces need legal cover to operate in insurgency areas, and the law lets them act without waiting for a magistrate.
- **Rights case:** sanction before prosecution slows accountability; Article 21 and 22 concerns (see [Article 22 and the safeguards on arrest](https://www.minimalistias.com/blog/article-22-arrest-detention-habeas-corpus-upsc)); the Hegde findings.
- **Reform view:** the Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee (2005) recommended repealing AFSPA and placing the needed powers in the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
- **Shrinking footprint:** withdrawn from Tripura (2015) and Meghalaya (2018); areas cut in Assam, Manipur and Nagaland in 2022, months after the Mon civilian killings.
- **Federal angle:** States often seek withdrawal, but the Centre can declare areas itself; Nagaland’s Assembly passed a resolution for repeal in December 2021.

*Figure: Timeline of AFSPA: enacted 1958; extended to all north-eastern States in 1972; upheld by the Supreme Court in 1997; Jeevan Reddy Committee 2005; Hegde Commission 2013 and EEVFAM judgment 2016; withdrawn from Tripura 2015 and Meghalaya 2018; areas cut in 2022; extended six months in October 2026.*

## What UPSC asks

The debate above is exactly how UPSC frames AFSPA: safeguards on one side, reform and rights on the other.

> **Prelims traps**
> • AFSPA is not martial law: civil administration continues and forces act in aid of civil power.
> • The Governor is not the only declaring authority; the Centre can declare too.
> • Section 6 is not absolute immunity: sanction is needed, with reasons, and is judicially reviewable.
> • AFSPA does not cover all of the North-East: Tripura and Meghalaya are out, and many areas elsewhere were cut.

**Related PYQ — UPSC CSE Mains 2015, GS Paper III**

**“Human right activists constantly highlight the fact that the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFSPA) is a draconian act leading to cases of human right abuses by security forces. What sections of AFSPA are opposed by the activists? Critically evaluate the requirement with reference to the view held by the Apex Court.”**

Use: name the contested concepts (force, arrest and search, sanction), then the 1997 and 2016 safeguards.

**See the detailed explanations:** [Mains 2015 papers](https://www.minimalistias.com/pyqs/mains) in the free PYQ vault, with year-wise analysis. Free to browse; free sign-up to download.

## Mentor’s note

Here is how to turn this into marks.

- **Don’t write that AFSPA gives blanket immunity.** Prosecution needs the Centre’s sanction, and the Court has held that the sanction decision needs reasons and is reviewable.
- **Don’t say only the Governor declares a disturbed area.** The Governor, the Administrator or the Centre can; the Centre’s power dates from the 1972 amendment.
- **Build a balanced answer in four blocks:** security rationale; safeguards (1997 and 2016); evidence (Hegde Commission, 2013); reform (Jeevan Reddy, 2005, and the shrinking footprint).
- **Quote concepts, not section numbers.** The 2015 question asked which provisions activists oppose; name the provisions by what they do.

## 60-second revision

- **Who can declare a disturbed area?** Governor, Administrator or the Centre.
- **Core of the human-rights critique?** Force and warrantless search, plus sanction before prosecution.
- **1997 case?** Naga People’s Movement of Human Rights: upheld, with a six-month review.
- **2005 committee?** Justice Jeevan Reddy: repeal and move the needed powers into the UAPA.
- **States fully out of AFSPA?** Tripura (2015) and Meghalaya (2018).

## Target Prelims MCQs

**With reference to the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, consider the following statements:**

1. **Only the Governor of a State can declare an area to be a ‘disturbed area’ under the Act.**
2. **Persons arrested by the armed forces under the Act must be handed over to the nearest police station with the least possible delay.**
3. **The Supreme Court has held that a declaration of a ‘disturbed area’ must be reviewed periodically.**

How many of the above statements are correct?  
(a) Only one  
(b) Only two  
(c) All three  
(d) None

**Answer: (b) Only two**

**Explanation:**

**Statement 1 is incorrect:** the Governor, the Administrator of a Union Territory or the Central Government can declare the area.

**Statement 2 is correct:** the Act requires hand-over to the officer in charge of the nearest police station with the least possible delay.

**Statement 3 is correct:** in 1997 the Court held that a declaration must be for a limited period and reviewed before six months expire.

**Consider the following statements:**

**Statement-I: A prosecution against armed forces personnel for acts done under the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 cannot be started without the previous sanction of the Central Government.**

**Statement-II: The Supreme Court has held that the Central Government’s decision to grant or refuse such sanction is subject to judicial review and must be supported by reasons.**

Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?  
(a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I  
(b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I  
(c) Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrect  
(d) Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct

**Answer: (b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I**

**Explanation:**

**Statement-I is correct:** the Act bars any prosecution, suit or other legal proceeding for acts under it without the Centre’s prior sanction.

**Statement-II is correct but does not explain Statement-I:** the sanction requirement comes from the Act itself; the Court’s reasons-and-review rule only limits how that discretion is used.

## Mains practice questions

> **Examine the safeguards that the Supreme Court has read into the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958. (Answer in 150 words; 10 Marks)**

> **The Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee recommended the repeal of AFSPA, yet the Act continues in parts of the North-East. Critically examine the case for and against its continuation and suggest a way forward. (Answer in 250 words; 15 Marks)**

## Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

### Where does AFSPA apply now?

For six months from 1 October 2026: Manipur except 13 valley police-station areas; nine Nagaland districts plus 21 police-station areas; Arunachal’s Tirap, Changlang and Longding districts plus three police-station areas in Namsai.

### What powers does AFSPA give the armed forces?

In a ‘disturbed’ area, they may use force after due warning, arrest and search without a warrant and destroy hideouts. Personnel cannot be prosecuted without the Union government’s sanction.

### Who can declare an area ‘disturbed’ under AFSPA?

The Governor of the State, the Administrator of a Union Territory or the Central Government, by Gazette notification for the whole or part of an area.

### Has the Supreme Court upheld AFSPA?

Yes. In Naga People’s Movement of Human Rights v Union of India (1997) a five-judge Bench upheld the Act, requiring minimum force, periodic review of declarations and reasons for sanction decisions.

## Terms to know

- **BNSS:** Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the criminal procedure code replacing the CrPC
- **EEVFAM:** Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association, the petitioner in the 2016 case

## Related reading

- [Article 22 and the safeguards on arrest and detention](https://www.minimalistias.com/blog/article-22-arrest-detention-habeas-corpus-upsc)
- [CBI, the DSPE Act and State consent: federalism](https://www.minimalistias.com/blog/cbi-dspe-act-state-consent-upsc-notes)
- [J&K Assembly’s Statehood resolution and Article 3](https://www.minimalistias.com/blog/jammu-kashmir-statehood-resolution-article-3)
- [All Daily UPSC Briefs](https://www.minimalistias.com/resources/daily-brief)

## Sources

- [The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 — Legislative Department](https://lddashboard.legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1958-28.pdf)
- [Naga People’s Movement of Human Rights v Union of India (1997) — judgment](https://www.legalauthority.in/judgement/naga-people-s-movement-of-human-rights-etc-etc-vs-union-of-india-24060)
- [EEVFAM v Union of India (2016) — Supreme Court](https://www.supremecourtcases.com/extra-judicial-execution-victim-families-association-eevfam-anr-v-union-of-india-anr/amp/)
- [Lok Sabha reply on the Santosh Hegde Commission report](https://eparlib.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/644696/1/144042.pdf)
- [PIB — reduction of AFSPA areas, 2022](https://static.pib.gov.in/WriteReadData/specificdocs/documents/2022/mar/doc202233134101.pdf)
- [All India Radio — AFSPA extended in Manipur, Nagaland and Arunachal](https://newsonair.gov.in/centre-extends-afspa-in-disturbed-areas-of-manipur-nagaland-and-arunachal-for-another-6-months/)

From [The Daily UPSC Brief](https://www.minimalistias.com/resources/daily-brief), 26 September 2026 — upgraded 14 October 2026 — by Shivam Singh.

---
Minimalist IAS — free UPSC study material and one-to-one mentorship. Canonical page: https://www.minimalistias.com/blog/afspa-extension-manipur-nagaland-arunachal