[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Tripura High Court
Accused vs Non-Applicant on 4 February, 2026
1
COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
A.B. No.05 of 2026
Sri Rajesh Ghosh,
S/o- Late Dhirendra Chandra Ghosh,
R/o- Deshbandhu Para, Barjala,
P.O.- Natun Nagar, Agartala, West Tripura,
Pin- 799009.
----Accused-petitioner(s)
Versus
Non-applicant:
The State of Tripura
Represented by Secretary, Home Department,
Government of Tripura,
New Secretariat Building,
Agartala, West Tripura,
Pin- 799010.
----Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Manojit Saha, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Raju Datta, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT
Order
04.02.2026
This pre-arrest bail application under Section 482 of
BNSS is filed for granting bail to the applicant-accused in
connection with NCC P.S. case No.87 of 2025 under Section
329(3)/117(2)/351(3)/308(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023.
Heard Learned Counsel, Mr. M. Saha appearing on
behalf of the applicant-accused and also heard Learned P.P., Mr.
R. Datta appearing on behalf of the State-respondent.
Taking part in the hearing, Learned Counsel drawn the
attention of the Court that based on a FIR laid by one Pradip
Chakraborty, this present case has been registered against the
applicant-accused and some other persons. It is further submitted
by Learned Counsel for the applicant-accused persons that the
present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case without
any basis. Learned Counsel thereafter submitted that according to
the informant, the last alleged incident took place on 22.12.2025
but this present applicant-accused was out of State w.e.f.
15.12.2025 to till the date of lodging of complaint and he has
been returned back on 24.12.2025. In support of this contention,
Learned Counsel has drawn the attention of the Court referring
the copies of e-tickets which have been enclosed with the bail
application. It was further submitted that the applicant-accused
was suffering from illness and his son was also suffering and as
such the applicant-accused along with his family members went
outside the State for the purpose of their treatment. Learned
Counsel again submitted that from the contents of the FIR and
also from the documents relied upon by the applicant, it will
transpire that on the day of alleged occurrence, he was out of
State. As such Learned Counsel urged for releasing the accused on
bail in any condition.
Per contra, Learned P.P, Mr. R. Datta appearing on
behalf of the State-respondent strongly opposed the submission
made by Learned Counsel for the applicant and submitted that in
this case by order dated 13.01.2026 Section 308(5) of BNSS has
been added on the prayer of I.O. by the Learned Trial Court which
has been suppressed by the present applicant and furthermore,
the present applicant-accused and others were causing
disturbance to the informant of this case for a quite long period to
grab his landed properties and also for application Section 308(5)
of BNS, the physical presence of accused is not required and
furthermore, considering the materials on record, Learned
Additional Sessions Judge by order dated 12.01.2026 disallowed
the bail application filed by the applicant-accused. So, at this
stage, there is no convincing material before this Court to consider
the pre-arrest bail application filed by the accused and urged for
dismissal of the same.
In this case, prosecution was set into motion on the
basis of an FIR laid by one Pradip Chakraborty to O/C, NCC P.S.
on 26.12.2025 (although the alleged FIR was drafted and signed
on 23.12.2025) against the present applicant-accused and 15
others with the allegation that for last 2 ½ years the accused
persons have been attacking the complainant on so many
occasions both physically and mentally to grab his landed
properties. The accused persons often used to create pressure
upon the informant to hand over his land by executing a gift deed
but when the informant disagreed with their proposal, thereafter,
on 05.11.2023 the accused persons physically assaulted the
informant in presence of his family members on the point of
revolver and after hearing his hue and cry when the neighbouring
persons appeared, the accused persons left that spot. Thereafter,
the accused persons continuously started threatening the
informant over telephone or through communicators on so many
occasions pressurizing him to hand over his land. After that on
13.12.2025 at about 12:00 hours the applicant-accused and
others assembled in front of the boundary gate of the informant
with deadly weapons in their hand till night around 03:00 hours,
but they could not enter inside his house. As a result of which, the
informant got severe life threats. After that the accused persons
came to the house of the informant and demanded money of
Rs.5,00,000/- being armed with fire arms and under compulsion,
the informant was forced to pay Rs.50,000/- to them to save his
life as well as his family members. Hence, this FIR was laid. On
the basis of the FIR this case has been registered. The
investigation of the case is in progress. Initially the case was
registered under Section 329(3)/117(2)/351(2)/308(2)/3(5) of
BNS, 2023. Later on, on the prayer of I.O. Section 308(5) of BNS
was added in this case by the Court. The I.O. in course of
investigation has recorded the statement of the informant, his wife
and some other persons. It is on record that the applicant-accused
along with others were creating disturbance for a quite long
period. They threatened to hand over his landed properties on so
many occasions sometimes physically assaulted him and
sometimes made demonstration in such a manner so that he may
be compelled to hand over his landed properties to them and
finally, according to prosecution, he was compelled to make
payment of Rs.50,000/- to the applicant-accused and others and
at the instance of the present applicant-accused some middle men
went to the residence of the informant to fulfill their demand. But
as he disagreed to their proposal, so, they became furious and
forcefully entered into his residence and forced him to pay
Rs.50,000/- to them. Even from the relevant prosecution papers,
if, it is assumed that on the relevant date the present applicant-
accused was absent at Agartala, in that case his involvement with
the alleged offence cannot be ruled out and in all the transactions,
the present applicant-accused was directly or indirectly involved
with the criminal act and lastly at the time of forcing the informant
to pay money, his involvement also cannot be ruled out even, if,
he was out of station also.
The investigation of the case is in progress. So,
considering the materials on record at this stage, I do not find any
scope to consider the pre-arrest bail application filed by the
present applicant-accused and more so, he is directly FIR named
and accused No.1 of the alleged case. Hence, the pre-arrest bail
application filed by the applicant-accused stands rejected being
devoid of merit.
Return back the Case Diary to I.O. through Learned
P.P. along with a copy of this order.
Also a copy of this order be communicated to the
Learned Trial Court for information.
JUDGE
MOUMITA Digitally signed by
MOUMITA DATTA
DATTA Date: 2026.02.05 10:15:15
+05'30'
Purnita
