Jhumi Begom Choudhury vs The State Of Tripura
2026 Latest Caselaw 1879 Tri

Tripura High Court

Jhumi Begom Choudhury vs The State Of Tripura on 25 March, 2026

                       HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA

                                  AGARTALA


                             BA 54 OF 2026

Jhumi Begom Choudhury
on behalf of accused Sri Sajahan Alom Laskar & Anr.
                                                      --- Applicant/Petitioner.
                                   Versus

The State of Tripura
                                                            --- Respondent.


For the Applicant/Petitioner :     Mr. Arpan Jamatia, Advocate.

For the Respondent            :    Mr. Raju Datta, P.P.


               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA

                                  ORDER

25.03.2026

It appears that earlier two co-accused persons submitted two separate bail applications bearing No.BA 36 of 2025 and BA 48 of 2025 in connection with the present police case, which were disposed of by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Learned P.P., in that context submits that earlier in one bail application being No.43 of 2026, this Court in such a similar matter directed the Registry to list the record before the another learned Bench which earlier decided anticipatory bail application of co-accused of that case and thereafter when regular bail prayer was filed that was also directed to be listed before that learned Bench.

Said order was passed by this Court relying on a decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Rajpal vs. State of Rajasthan, 2023 Livelaw SC 1066. However, today another judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Shekhar Prasad Mahto @ Shekhar Kushwaha vs. The Registrar General Jharkhand High Couirt & Anr. in Writ Petition (Criminal) No(s).55/2025 is placed to the notice of the

Court wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that where in a particular High Court the bail applications are assigned to different single Judge/Bench, in that event, all the applications arising out of the same FIR should be placed before one learned Judge. However, if on account of change of the roster, the learned Judge who was earlier dealing with the bail matters is not taking up the same, the learned Judge who will be dealing with bail application as per roster, will hear the subsequent bail application and the Judge will give due weightage to the view taken by the earlier Judge.

In view of the said direction, the present bail application is being taken up for hearing by this Court today.

Heard learned counsels of both sides.

Order is reserved.

JUDGE

SANJAY GHOSH Digitally signed by SANJAY GHOSH Date: 2026.03.26 17:29:54 +05'30'

sanjay