Unknown vs For
2026 Latest Caselaw 1012 Tri

Tripura High Court

Unknown vs For on 24 February, 2026

Author: T. Amarnath Goud

Bench: T. Amarnath Goud

                           HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                                 AGARTALA

                         IA No.1 of 2026 in Crl.A.6 of 2026

For Applicant(s)                : Mr. P. Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate
                                  Mr. Samarjit Bhattacharjee, Advocate
                                  Mr. Kawsik Nath, Advocate
                                  Mr. Dipjyoti Paul, Advocate
                                  Ms. Aradhita Debbarma, Advocate

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


               HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD
              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA
                                       ORDER

24.02.2026

Heard Mr. K. Nath, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also

heard Mr. Raju Datta, learned P.P. appearing for the State respondent.

Issue notice to the respondents to show cause as to why the delay of 17

days in preferring the connected appeal should not be condoned as prayed for and

such further order(s) or other order(s) should not be passed as this Court may deem

fit and proper.

Steps be taken immediately.

Since Mr. Raju Datta, learned P.P. appears and waives service of notice

on behalf of the State, no formal notice needs be issued upon the said respondent.

Registry is to serve notice upon the remaining respondents i.e.

Respondents No.2 & 3 as per procedure and file proof of service. Learned counsel

for the applicant is also at liberty to take out personal notice by way of RPAD/ Dasti

service on the respondents and file proof of service.

List the matter once proof of service of notice upon the respondents is

received and the same is placed on record.

S. Datta Purkayastha, J. Dr. T. Amarnath Goud, J.

Sabyasachi. G.

SABYASACHI GHOSH GHOSH Date: 2026.02.27 15:13:15 +05'30'