Sri Sattar Miah vs The State Of Tripura
2026 Latest Caselaw 212 Tri

Tripura High Court

Sri Sattar Miah vs The State Of Tripura on 3 February, 2026

                              Page 1 of 2




                    HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                          AGARTALA

                          I.A.01 of 2026
                                In
                      BA No.115 of 2025 (D/O)
Sri Sattar Miah,
S/o Habil Miah,
Vill-Jalpara, Rangamatiya,
P.O.: Khedabari, P.S.: Sonamura,
District: Sepahijala, State: Tripura.
                                                     ----Applicant(s)
For and on behalf of the accused in custody
Md. Selim Ahammed,
S/o Late Mukbul Hossain,
Resident of Saheb Sardar,
P.S.(Hazrat Para), P.S.:Kotwali,
District:Cumilla, Bangladesh.
                                              ----Accused Person(s)

                               Versus
The State of Tripura, represented by the Secretary,
Department of Home, Government of Tripura, Agartala.
                                                  ----Respondent(s)

For Applicant(s) : Mr. Anjan Kanti Pal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajib Saha, Addl. P.P.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT Order 03/02/2026 Heard Learned Counsel, Mr. Anjan Kanti Pal appearing

on behalf of the accused person in custody. Also heard Learned

Addl. P.P., Mr. Rajib Saha appearing on behalf of the respondent-

State.

This application is filed by the applicant for modification

of the order dated 19.11.2025 passed by this Court in connection

with BA No.115 of 2025.

By the said order this Court partly modified the order

dated 04.09.2025 and directed that the accused in custody may

be released on bail on his execution of bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/-

with two sureties of like amount out of whom one surety must be

a public servant i.d. to remain in J/C as before. The said order was

duly communicated to the accused in custody and also to the

Learned Court below. The case is now posted for appearance of

PWs in the month of June, 2026.

Learned Counsel for the accused person in custody at

the time of hearing submitted that by exercising the inherent

power, the order passed by this Court may be modified as

because the accused in custody is not in a position to fulfill the

conditions of bail granted to him.

On the other hand, Learned Addl. P.P. appearing on

behalf of the respondents-State submitted that in the erstwhile

Cr.P.C. or in the BNSS there is no scope for reviewing the order

passed by this Court.

Furthermore, Learned Counsel for the accused person

in custody failed to satisfy the Court showing any legal provision

to consider the present application for modification of the earlier

order.

I also agree with the submissions advanced by Learned

Addl. P.P. for the respondent-State. Also, I find no scope to

consider the present interlocutory application filed by the

applicant/accused in custody.

Accordingly, the same stands rejected being devoid of

merit. The case is thus disposed of.

                                                                               JUDGE



Snigdha



SNIGDHA   Digitally signed by
          SNIGDHA DAS

DAS       Date: 2026.02.03
          17:20:34 +05'30'