Smt. Munna Devi For And On Behalf Of vs The State Of Tripura
2026 Latest Caselaw 2283 Tri

Tripura High Court

Smt. Munna Devi For And On Behalf Of vs The State Of Tripura on 6 April, 2026

                             HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                                 AGARTALA
                                    B.A. No.60 of 2026

Smt. Munna Devi for and on behalf of,
Sri Dilip Kumar Singh,
Resident of Khejurbagan, Goyalabasti, P.S. N.C.C., District West Tripura.
                                                                     ......... Petitioner(s)
Sri Dilip Kumar Singh,
Son of Late Guna Singh, resident of Khejurbagan, Goyalabasti, P.S. N.C.C.,
District West Tripura
                              .........Custody accused person (Jail Custody)
                                    -Versus-
The State of Tripura,
Represented by the Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Tripura,
Agartala.
                                                     ........Respondent(s)

For the Petitioner/Accused Person(s)       :         Mr. A.K. Pal, Advocate.
                                                     Mr. S. Rn. Chakraborty, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s)                      :         Mr. Raju Datta, P.P.


                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA
                                       ORDER

06/04/2026

Heard learned counsel of both sides.

[2] The charge against the present accused persons in this case are framed under Sections 448/354/325/506/34 IPC and also under Section 8 of the POCSO Act, 2012. Other three accused persons are also facing trial along with the present petitioner in said case for the charges under Sections 448/354/323/506/34 IPC and also under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. Out of twenty cited witnesses by the prosecution in the charge-sheet, ten witnesses are already examined.

[3] As the petitioner was absent during such trial, on 20.02.2026, learned Special Judge (POCSO), West Tripura, Agartala directed to issue warrant against the present petitioner namely, Dilip Kumar Singh and thereafter on

05.03.2026, he surrendered before the Court and then he was taken into custody after rejecting his bail prayer and since then he is in custody.

[4] Record shows that earlier on some occasions also he remained absent in the Court on some grounds during said trial and there is also allegation against all the accused persons for threatening the prosecution witnesses. Learned Special Judge also issued notice to show cause the accused persons on that issue but thereafter, it is not clear whether any enquiry is being conducted by learned Special Judge regarding the allegation of threatening of witnesses or not.

[5] Mr. A.K. Pal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for one month the accused is in custody and if he is released on bail on any stringent condition, he will regularly appear before the Court and will not create any sort of inconvenience in smooth proceeding of the trial. He also submits that the accused person undertakes that no threat or coercion will be administered upon any of the witnesses of the prosecution who are yet to be examined.

[6] Mr. Raju Datta, learned P.P. submits that there are allegations of threatening of prosecution witnesses and the conduct of the present petitioner is also not good as he has already demonstrated his tendency to remain absent during trial on some occasions. However, after considering the fact that for one month he is in custody, if the bail prayer is allowed, in that case certain stringent conditions may be imposed upon him to ensure his attendance in the Court.

[7]      Considered the submissions of both sides.


[8]      Without giving any opinion in the matter of threatening of witnesses

which is within the consideration of the Court of the learned Special Judge, this Court considers that another indulgence may be granted to the petitioner releasing him on bail as for one month he is in custody, however, some stringent conditions are also required to be imposed on him.

[9] Considering all these aspects, the bail prayer is allowed.

[10] Accused petitioner namely, Dilip Kumar Singh may go on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the

satisfaction of learned Special Judge (POCSO), West Tripura, Agartala on condition that-

(i) he will appear before the Court during trial on every date unless incapacitated by any special circumstances beyond his control and he will cooperate with the learned Trial Court regarding completion of the trial;

(ii) he will not try to terrorize or influence any witness of the case who are yet to be examined and will not try to make any contact with them;

(iii) he will give his attendance once in a week before the learned Special Judge till the trial is completed or till the condition is relaxed by learned Special Judge.

Send a copy of this order to learned Special Judge (POCSO), West Tripura, Agartala immediately.

Re-consign the Trial Court record.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

JUDGE

Rudradeep RUDRADEEP BANERJEE Digitally signed by RUDRADEEP BANERJEE Date: 2026.04.06 17:57:13 +05'30'