Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Tri) 395
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
W.P.(Crl.) No.06 of 2026
Ratna Roy, W/o Sri Sankar Saha, R/o Ward No.21, Banamalipur, Agartala, P.O. Agartala Post Office, P.S. East Agartala, District- West Tripura, PIN-799001 .........Petitioner(s);
Versus
1. The State of Tripura to be represented by Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of Tripura, New Secretariat Building, New Capital Complex, Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, Agartala, West Tripura, PIN-799010
2. The Director General of Police, Tripura, O/o the Director General of Police, Tripura, Police Head Quarters, Fire Brigade Chowmuhani, P.O. Agartala, West Tripura, PIN-799001
3. The Superintendent of Police, West Tripura District, Office of the Superintendent of Police, West Tripura District, Agartala, Akhaura Road, near Fire Brigade Chowmuhani, PIN-799001
4. The Officer-in-Charge, East Agartala Police Station, Banamalipur, Agartala, Tripura, PIN-799001
5. The Officer-in-Charge, East Agartala Women Police Station, Banamalipur, Agartala, Tripura, PIN-799001
6. The Agartala Municipal Corporation represented by its Commissioner
7. Sri Rabindranath Ghosh, an employee of the Agartala Municipal Corporation .........Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Samarjit Bhattacharjee, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Saktimoy Chakraborti, Advocate General, Mr. Raju Datta, Public Prosecutor, Mrs. Pinki Chakraborty, Advocate, Ms. Priyanka Chakraborty, Advocate.
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT
Date of hearing : 01.09.2026
Date of Judgment & Order : 17.09.2026
Whether Fit for Reporting : YES
(BISWAJIT PALIT, J) (M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, CJ)
Pijush/Date: 2026.09.17 13:19:50 +05'30'
JUDGMENT & ORDER
(M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.)
In this matter, this Court had passed a detailed Order on 02.07.2026 in relation to an incident which happened on 04.04.2026 where the son of the petitioner by name Saikat Saha was forcibly taken by one Rabindranath Ghosh, an employee of the Agartala Municipal Corporation and one Joy Debnath (a Special Police Officer) to the East Agartala Police Station, and in the presence of the police personnel on the intervening nights of 04.04.2026 and 05.04.2026, he was assaulted, humiliated and tortured.
The said incidents were recorded in CCTV cameras which were directed to be seized by this Court by an Order passed in this case on 06.05.2026.
A Special Investigation Team (SIT) was also constituted on 14.05.2026 headed by an Inspector General of Police.
The SIT filed a report on 16.06.2026 confirming the allegations leveled by the petitioner against Rabindranath Ghosh and Joy Debnath prima facie.
The Home Secretary, Government of Tripura also filed a Counter Affidavit stating that police officials of the East Agartala Police Station were issued show cause notices, and were placed under suspension, and Departmental proceedings were initiated against them.
The services of Rabindranath Ghosh and Joy Debnath appear to have been terminated subsequently, and a charge sheet has been filed against both of them in the jurisdictional criminal court.
But this Court held in the Order dt. 02.07.2026 that it is desirable to monitor the investigation by the SIT.
The matter was again listed on 25.08.2026.
The Status Report dt. 21.08.2026 filed by the SIT was perused on 25.08.2026 which indicated that a charge sheet had been filed against both the accused in the jurisdictional Criminal Court after the filing of the Final Report stating that the case was non-cognizable.
On 25.08.2026, this Court also directed the respondents to place on record what action has been initiated against the Officer-in-Charge of the East Agartala Police Station, and also against the policemen, who were on duty in the said Police Station, when the alleged assault on the son of the petitioner took place on 04.04.2026.
The Deputy Secretary of the Home Department, Government of Tripura has filed an affidavit dt. 29.08.2026 stating that articles of charge have been framed against the Officer-in-Charge and other policemen after placing them under suspension and the said proceedings are continuing.
We may point out that this Court was able to intervene effectively in the matter only because there was CCTV footage available on what transpired inside the East Agartala Police Station on the intervening nights of 04.04.2026 and 05.04.2026.
However we have noticed that another case W.P.(Crl). No.10/2026 which had come up for consideration before us, though similar assault was alleged to have taken place at police station, the CCTV footage was not available, and it was brought to our notice that three days before the date of the incident and three days after the date of the incident, the CCTV inside the police station was non-functional.
This aspect came to light during the hearing of W.P.(Crl.) No.10/2026 in Smt. Lipika Lodh v. The State of Tripura & Others.
To ensure that this does not occur again, we therefore deem it appropriate to deal with this issue.
Judgment of Supreme Court in Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh & Others:
In this regard, we may take note of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh & Others1Judgment dt.02.12.2020 in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.3543 of 2020.
The directions given in regard to installation of CCTVs in all police stations in that judgment are as under:
16. The State and Union Territory Governments should ensure that CCTV cameras are installed in each and every Police Station functioning in the respective State and/or Union Territ
