HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA

AGARTALA

BA No.142 of 2025

Smt. Usha Rani Biswas W/o- Sri Ratan Biswas, R.O. Jogendranagar, Agartala, P.O. Jogendranagar, P.S. East

Agartala, Dist. West Tripura-799004.

……..Applicant(s) For and on behalf of

Smt. Madhabi Biswas, D/o- Sri Ratan Biswas, R.O. Jogendranagar, Agartala, P.O. Jogendranagar & P.S. East

Agartala, Dist. West Tripura-799004.

-----Accused(s)

Versus

The State of Tripura (represented by the Ld. Public

Prosecutor, Hon'ble High Court of Tripura)

….Respondent(s)

For Applicant(s) : Mr. P.Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate.

Mr. S.Bhattacharjee, Advocate.

Mr. Kawsik Nath, Advocate.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Raju Datta,PP.

Mr. R. Saha , Addl .PP. =B=E=F=O=R=E

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA

=O=R=D=E=R=

07.01.2026

Heard Ld. Sr. Counsel Mr. P. Roy Barman assisted

by Mr. Samarjit Bhattacharje, Advocate and Mr. Kawsik Nath, Advocate for the applicant. Also heard Mr. Raju Datta, Ld.PP

and Mr. R.Saha, Ld. Addl. PP for the state respondent.

[2] The FIR was lodged by one Rahul Bhattacharjee that the accused applicant Smt. Madhabi Biswas was using abusive, derogatory and criticizing language to malign the

Hon’ble Prime Minister at the instance of CPI(M) political party and moreover, she has also used unwanted languages against the Mayor of Agartala Municipal Corporation and even used unexpected words against Mata Tripureswari and her such behavior and activities were not tolerated by the inmates of East Pratapgarh area. Further allegation was that she had posted all these in the social media on her account and even had posted nude pictures of her own in her Facebook account. The Police authority registered the FIR as East Agartala P.S. Case No. 2025 EAG 108 under Sections 356(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita(for short–‘BNS’)2023 and Section 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000.

[3] Ld. Sr. Counsel, Mr. P. Roy Barman for the applicant submits that there are some other cases also against the accused and she was shown arrested in this case on 12.11.2025 and since then she is in custody and the allegations as brought against her are also not so serious and prescribed punishment are also below 7 years. Therefore, bail may be granted on any condition.

[4] According to Ld. Sr. Counsel Mr. P. Roy Barman, the allegations, as made in the FIR also do not attract provision of Section 67 of the IT Act and Section 356(2) of BNS is bailable one.

[5] Ld. PP Mr. Raju Datta as well as Ld. Addl. PP Mr. R. Saha seriously oppose the bail prayer mainly on the ground that the investigation in this case is already completed and charge sheet is already filed against the accused under Section 356(2) of BNS and Section 67 of the IT Act,2000 and a petition for custody trial is also pending before the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Tripura and therefore, till the matter is decided by Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, the bail application may be kept pending.

Considered the submission.

[6] Court has gone through the above said provisions under which the charge sheet is submitted. The Section 356, BNS is bailable one and provision of Section 67 of IT Act is non bailable, but, prescribed punishment for the same is imprisonment upto 3 years for the first offence and imprisonment upto 5 years for subsequent offences. For almost about 2 months, she is in custody and investigation is already completed.

[7] Considering thus, it appears to the Court that keeping this matter pending awaiting for decision of Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate regarding petition for custody trial will further linger the incarceration when already she is in judicial custody for a considerable period. However, Court is also not inclined to interfere with the jurisdiction of Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate regarding his decision on the petition submitted by the Investigating Officer on 03.01.2026 praying for such custodial trial of the accused on certain grounds.

[8] Considering all these aspects, Court feels it proper to dispose of the bail application by granting interim bail to the accused Madhab