Tripura High Court Slams Government Officials for Misleading the Court, Orders Action Against Home Department and Police Officers Over False Affidavits
By Our Correspondent
Agartala, June 17, 2026
In a significant development that could have far-reaching implications for administrative accountability in Tripura, the Division Bench of the Tripura High Court, comprising Chief Justice MS Ramachandra Rao and Justice Biswajit Palit, has strongly criticized senior officials of the State Home Department and Police for allegedly submitting false information before the court and attempting to mislead the judiciary.
In what legal observers describe as a rare and unprecedented move, the High Court reportedly rejected a government affidavit and directed the State Government to initiate appropriate action against officials responsible for filing incorrect and misleading statements before the court.
The case relates to the alleged assault of a youth, Saikat Saha, inside East Agartala Police Station on April 4 this year. According to allegations, Saha was picked up from Dhaleswar and brought to the police station, where he was allegedly attacked by civilians in the presence of police personnel before being handed over to the police.
Initially, East Agartala Police Station conducted an inquiry and informed the court that no assault had taken place inside the police station. However, a Special Investigation Team (SIT), constituted on the direction of the High Court, later reached a completely different conclusion. The SIT found that Saikat Saha was indeed assaulted inside the police station premises by outsiders while police personnel were present and failed to intervene.
Taking serious note of the SIT findings, the Division Bench questioned how the Home Department could subsequently file an affidavit denying the incident despite evidence gathered by the SIT. The court expressed concern over attempts to mislead the judiciary through false statements and directed that action be taken against the concerned Home Department officials, including the Under Secretary who filed the affidavit.
The court also ordered strict action against the police officer who had earlier submitted what the SIT investigation subsequently revealed to be an incorrect report. The judges observed that it was deeply troubling that civilians could allegedly enter a police station and assault a citizen in the presence of law enforcement personnel without any intervention from the police.
Senior advocate Purushottam Ray Barman who was pleading the case on behalf of Saikat Saha, said media personnel that during the hearing, Chief Justice MS Ramachandra Rao and Justice Biswajit Palit reportedly made strong observations against officials of both the Police Department and the Home Department for providing misleading information to the court. The Bench emphasized that all individuals responsible for the incident, as well as those responsible for concealing the truth, must be held accountable.
The case has already resulted in significant administrative action. Rabindra Narayan Ghosh, a former Agartala Municipal Corporation Task Force official accused of demanding a bribe of Rs.2 lakh from Saikat Saha's family in exchange for approving a building plan, has already been dismissed from service. Subsequently, police arrested Ghosh and another individual in connection with the alleged assault on Saikat Saha. Both accused are currently in judicial custody.
The High Court has also sought a detailed report from the Commissioner of Agartala Municipal Corporation regarding the action taken against the dismissed official and related developments.
The matter is scheduled to come up again for further hearing before the Tripura High Court on June 23, 2026, when the court is expected to review compliance with its directions and consider further action against the officials involved.
The case has drawn widespread attention as it raises serious questions about police accountability, administrative transparency, and the responsibility of government officials to provide truthful information before constitutional courts. The High Court's observations underscore the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that public authorities remain accountable and that attempts to mislead the court do not go unpunished.
more news...