HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA

A G A R T A L A

RFA 17 OF 2015

Shri Pinaki Samanta,

son of Sri Jogendra Chandra Samanta,

resident of Ramkrishna Ashram Road,

Town Bordowali, P.O. and Sub-Division- Agartala,

PS- West Agartala, District- West Tripura, PIN-799001

………… Appellant

– V e r s u s –

1. The State of Tripura

represented by the Secretary, Home Department,

Government of Tripura, New Capital Complex,

Agartala, District- West Tripura

2. Shri Subrata Debnath

son of Shri Gouranga Debnath,

presently posted as Inspector of Tripura Police

in the West Tripura District,

Notice be served through Director General of Police,

Tripura, Police Head Quarter, A.K. Road,

P.O. and Sub-Division: Agartala, P.S. West Agartala,

District- West Tripura.

3. Shri Pritish Bhattacharjee

son of Late Gayaram Bhattacharjee,

Inspector of Police (CID), Tripura Police,

Drop Gate, P.O. A.D. Nagar, Sub- Division:Agartala,

P.S. : West Agartala, District:West Tripura,

(Investigating Officer submitted Charge sheet in

Ompi P.S. Case No. 09 of 2008)

4. Shri Subhash Chandra Das

son of not known,

Additional Superintendent of Police (Retired),

Criminal Investigation Department, Tripura Police,

A.D. Nagar, Agartala, District:West Tripura,

care of Superintendent of Police (CID), Tripura Sate,

Agartala:799001,

Presently residing at Abhoynagar, Near Budhamandir,

P.O.:Abhoynagar, P.S. : East Agartala, District:West Tripura.

5. Smti Sumitra Devi Jamatia

wife of Shri Andolan Jamatia, Marua Para, Village- Nagrai, P.O. and P.S.

Ompi, District- South Tripura.

………… Respondents

Page 2 of 131

Appellant-in-person

For the Respondent (s)

:

Mr. M Debbarma, Addl. G A,

Mr. N Majumdar, Adv.

Mr. G S Bhattacharjee, Adv.

Date of hearing

: 22.02.2021

Date of delivery of

:

26.08.2021*

Judgment & order

Whether fit for reporting

:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH

JUDGMENT & ORDER

[Talapatra. J]

This is an appeal by the plaintiff under Section 96 of the

CPC from the judgment dated 05.08.2015 delivered in Money Suit

No. 25/2010 by the Civil Judge, Sr. Div., Court No. 2, West Tripura,

Agartala. By the said judgment, the suit for damages and

compensation for malicious prosecution against the plaintiff and the

defamation that he has suffered owing to wrongful detention in

connection with Ompi P.S. Case No. 09/2008 under Section

380/454 of the IPC has been dismissed.

2.

While dismissing the suit of the petitioner for damages

and compensation to the extent of Rs. 1 Crore on different heads,

the civil Judge has observed that:

YES

NO



* For dislocation caused by pandemic in court functioning.

Page 3 of 131

i)

It cannot be said that the prosecution was instituted without

any reasonable or probably cause as ―it is an admitted fact that the

plaintiff went to the place of occurrence on the date of incident

during the lifting of the iron chest‖. So there was probable cause

for the police to submit the police report on completion of the

investigation.

ii)

It cannot be stated that the defendants acted maliciously in

this case because they were bound to follow the procedure of law

under Section 154 CrPC after registration of the First Information

Report (FIR) in a cognizable case. In the course of the

investigation, the evidentiary materials were collected and the

investigation officer having been satisfied had arrested the plaintiff

as the ring of suspicion existed in respect of the involvement of the

plaintiff.

iii)

The plaintiff did not file any prayer before the superior court

for quashing the FIR and also did not challenge the charge by a

revision in the superior court. The said FIR was filed by a tribal

lady. The police is authorised to investigate the case in a

cognizable offence. During