HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA

AGARTALA

AB_89 OF 2025

Dr. Partha Bhattacharya (Age 64 years),

S/o Lt. Sudhir Chandra Bhattacharya,

R/o H.G.B. Road, Basanti Ausadhalaya,

P.O. H.P.O., P.S. West Agartala, Dist. West Tripura, Pin 799001.

--- Applicant/Petitioner.

Versus

The State of Tripura

--- Respondent.

BEFORE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA

For the Applicant/Petitioner : Mr. Samrat Kar Bhowmik, Sr.Advocate.

Mr. E.L.Darlong, Advocate.

Mr. N. Das, Advocate.

Mr. N. Debnath, Advocate.

For the Respondent : Mr. Raju Datta, P.P.

Date of hearing : 05.12.2025.

Date of delivery of

Judgment & Order : 05.01.2026 Whether fit for reporting : YES NO



JUDGMENT AND ORDER

This application for pre-arrest bail is submitted by accused Dr.

Partha Bhattacharjee, in connection with East Agartala P.S. Case No.116/2025, registered under Sections 108/318(4) of BNS, 2023 and subsequently added

with Section 316(5) of BNS, 2023.

2. One Smt. Shyamasri Saha, W/o Dipak Saha lodged an ejahar on 16.10.2025 before the O.C., East Agartala P.S. alleging that on 12.10.2025 her husband committed suicide for not getting back Rs.2,50,00,000/- [Rupees Two Crores Fifty Lakhs only] from the accused-petitioner [here-in-after

referred to as the „petitioner‟], who is the proprietor of „Basanti Ausadhalaya‟. It is further alleged that during the life time of her husband since the said money was not returned to him, her husband several times communicated with the petitioner but he did not pick up the phone call of the deceased and was rather avoiding him. She has also alleged that by committing fraud upon her husband for the purpose of starting a Hospital, he took the said amount from her husband and due to cheating of the petitioner, her husband committed suicide.

3. The petitioner submitted a pre-arrest bail application before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala, which was turned down.

4. Learned senior counsel, Mr. S. Kar Bhowmik, at the time of hearing refers to different terms and conditions of the written agreement entered into between the deceased and the petitioner and submits that in terms of said agreement, the petitioner, after taking money from the deceased, deposited the same at Union Bank to clear up his previous loan, and accordingly, he also collected a Loan Clearance Certificate, and actually, he received Rs.1,00,00,000- [for short, 1.00 Crore] from the deceased in terms of said agreement and not Rs.2.50 Crores as alleged by the informant. Learned senior counsel also submits that there is no whisper in the FIR about any sort of abetment committed by the petitioner compelling the deceased to commit suicide. He is a 64-year-old and a reputed doctor of the township, and there is no possibility of his fleeing away. Learned senior counsel further submits that though the police authority has continued the investigation under both Sections 318(4) and 316(5) of BNS, 2023, but both the provisions cannot coexist.

Learned senior counsel relies on some decisions of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court, which will be discussed in relevant paragraphs.

5. Learned senior counsel also prayed for interim bail of the petitioner till disposal of the bail application to which learned P.P. opposed the said prayer and submitted that in Section 482 of BNS,2023 no such provision of granting interim bail was made available and therefore, the Court has no jurisdiction to grant any such interim relief. This Court, however, pending the decision on that point, directed the investigating officer not to take any coercive action against the petitioner till disposal of the petition.

6. On the merit of the petition, learned P.P. submits that in fact when the petitioner entered into an agreement with the deceased, the building permission of the petitioner, issued on 17.04.2012, was already expired just after three years therefrom, but knowing fully well the same, he suppressed the said fact to the deceased and collected huge amount from him alluring to enter into such a contract with him. According to learne