The State Of Tripura vs .
2025 Latest Caselaw 206 Tri

Tripura High Court

The State Of Tripura vs . on 29 July, 2025

Author: T. Amarnath Goud

Bench: T. Amarnath Goud

                                  Page 1 of 2




                         HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                                AGARTALA
                            CRL.L.P. NO.3 OF 2025
                           IN CRL.A NO.11 OF 2025
  The State of Tripura
  Vs.
  Sri Sounak Choudhury.

             HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD
              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT

  Present:
  For the Appellant(s)            : Mr. R. Datta, P.P.

  For the Respondent(s)           : Mr. P.K. Biswas, Sr. Advocate.

Mr. R. Nath, Advocate.

Mr. C. Mog, Advocate.

Mr. P. Biswas, Advocate.

29.07.2025 Order

1. This present application has been filed under Section 378(3)Cr.P.C., corresponding to Section 419 of BNSS for granting Special Leave to appeal against the Judgment dated 01.03.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge(NDPS), South Tripura, Belonia in case No.Special(NDPS) 16 of 2024 whereby the respondent -accused person have been acquitted.

2. Heard Mr.Raju Datta, learned P.P., appearing for the appellant-State as well as Mr. P.K. Biswas, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. P. Biswas, learned counsel and Mr. C. Mog, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

3. Mr. R. Datta, learned P.P., appearing for the appellant-State submits that the learned Trial Court wrongly held that the investigating agency has failed to comply with the requirement of Section 42(2) of NDPS Act. To support his argument, learned P.P., relied

upon the Judgments on the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2003) 8 SCC 449 titled as M. Prabhulal Vs. Assistant Director, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence and (2021) 19 SCC 197 titled as Kallu Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan.

4. On the other hand, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the respondent rebutted the said argument of the learned P.P., and to support his contention, learned Sr. counsel relied upon the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2021) 19 SCC 606 titled as Boota Singh and ors Vs. State of Haryana.

5. After hearing learned counsel appearing for the parties, and on perusal of the material placed on record, including the citations, relied upon by both the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the matter requires further examination. Accordingly, the present criminal leave petition is allowed and same stands disposed of.

                           B. PALIT, J                 DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD, J


      suhanjit



SABYASAC Digitally signed by
         SABYASACHI GHOSH

HI GHOSH Date: 2025.08.01
         11:38:27 +05'30'