Woman Judicial Officer vs Doctor: Tripura Physician Seeks Chief Justice's Intervention, Alleges Harassment Despite Anticipatory Bail
By Our Correspondent
Agartala, July 24, 2026
A continuing legal dispute between Kamalpur-based physician Dr. N. Dutta and a serving woman judicial officer has raised fresh questions about the functioning of the criminal justice system and police administration in Tripura. Claiming that his complaints were ignored while a criminal case against him was promptly acted upon, Dr. Dutta has appealed to the Chief Justice of the Tripura High Court, seeking an independent and impartial investigation.
According to documents submitted by Dr. Dutta, he filed written representations before the Chief Justice of the Tripura High Court, the Registrar General, the Superintendent of Police (West), the Cyber Crime authorities, and the Officer-in-Charge of East Agartala Women Police Station, alleging that he had not received any effective legal remedy despite approaching multiple authorities.
Competing Allegations
Dr. Dutta alleges that he developed a close relationship with a Civil Judge (Junior Division) posted in south Tripura district, based on a promise of marriage. During the relationship, he claims to have given substantial cash, gold jewellery, and other valuables. He further alleges that after the relationship ended, he lost access to his Google and social media accounts after their passwords were changed and that his money and valuables were not returned.
In contrast, the woman judicial officer's FIR presents a completely different version. It alleges that Dr. Dutta falsely represented himself as unmarried despite allegedly being married and involved in multiple matrimonial disputes. Dr. Dutta has denied these allegations, maintaining that he is unmarried.
The FIR also accuses him of attempting to defame and intimidate her, circulating private photographs and objectionable content on social media, and subjecting her to harassment after the relationship ended. Based on these allegations, West Agartala Police registered a criminal case under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the Information Technology Act.
Apprehending arrest, Dr. Dutta approached the Court of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Tripura, seeking anticipatory bail. On June 17, 2026, the Court of the Sessions Judge No. 5 granted him anticipatory bail in Bail Application No. 85 of 2026.
The court observed that the offences alleged against him were punishable with imprisonment of up to seven years, that the Investigating Officer had not issued a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, and that the investigation was still at a preliminary stage. The court further noted that the prosecution had not demonstrated any necessity for custodial interrogation.
Relying on the Supreme Court's rulings in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI, the court reiterated that arrest should ordinarily not be the first course of action in offences punishable with imprisonment of up to seven years. It directed that, in the event of arrest, Dr. Dutta be released on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety of the like amount, subject to conditions including full cooperation with the investigation, appearance before the Investigating Officer whenever required, non-interference with witnesses, and preservation of evidence.
Allegations of Continued Harassment
Despite securing anticipatory bail, Dr. Dutta alleges that he continues to face harassment through questioning by certain influential police officers and has been pressured to withdraw his complaint against the woman judicial officer. He further claims that while the police actively pursued the FIR lodged against him, no meaningful investigation has been initiated into the complaints he had earlier submitted to the West Agartala Police or the Superintendent of Police (West).
The case has prompted debate over whether complaints made by ordinary citizens against members of the judiciary receive equal attention and impartial investigation. Legal experts point out that because one party is a serving judicial officer and the other is a medical practitioner, the matter requires exceptional transparency and neutrality to preserve public confidence in the justice system.
In his complaint, Dr. Dutta has also alleged that during their nearly one-year relationship, the judicial officer misused government accommodation, travelled without permission, accepted approximately Rs. 4.5 lakh worth of gold jewellery, Rs. 3 lakh in cash, and an additional Rs. 50,000 on the promise of marriage, misused his Google and Instagram accounts, threatened to shut down his dental clinic at RMS Chowmuhani in Agartala, and subjected him to mental harassment. He has sought an independent inquiry and appropriate administrative and legal action into these allegations.
It is important to note that the allegations made by Dr. Dutta are based solely on his representations and have not been independently verified. As of now, there has been no FIR, official investigation, or judicial finding establishing the truth of the allegations against the judicial officer. Likewise, no official response has been issued by the woman judicial officer or the concerned authorities regarding Dr. Dutta's claims.
Legal observers maintain that an impartial investigation into the allegations and counter-allegations is essential to establish the facts and uphold public confidence in the rule of law, while ensuring that the rights of both parties are protected through due process.
more news...