Tripura High Court

WRIT PETITION 10 of 2025 on 16 September 2025

Cites 0, Cited by 0

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WP(CRL.) NO.10 OF 2025

Present:

For the Appellant(s)

For the Respondent(s)

: Mr. Debalay Bhattacharjee, Sr. Advocate.

Mr. Samar Das, Advocate.

: Mr. B. Majumder, Deputy SGI. Mr. R. Datta, P.P. Mr. R. Datta, P.P.

HON’BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUDHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT

16.09.2025

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

Order

1. When the case is called, both the sides are present. 2. The prayer as sought for in the present writ petition are as follows:- “i. ISSUE RULE, calling upon the respondents and each one of them, to show cause as to why a Writ of Mandamus and/or in the nature thereof, shall not be issued, mandating/directing the State-respondents to register an FIR and handover the investigation to Central Bureau of Investigation;

ii. Absolute; After hearing the parties, be pleased to make the Rule

iii. Any other RELIEF(s) as to this Hon'ble High Court may deem fit and proper.”

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that he was influenced by a certain advertisement on social media and, being carried away by the same, he deposited various amounts on different dates through online transactions from his Axis Bank and ICICI Bank accounts, totaling Rs.90,37,587.44, between 21.07.2025 and 04.08.2025.

4. Thereafter, the petitioner realized that it was a fraudulent company which had duped him. He filed a complaint before the Officer-in-Charge, Cyber Police Station, AD Nagar, Agartala, West Tripura, on 21.08.2025. To his surprise, there has been no communication from the concerned police officials, nor any progress in the form of registration of an FIR or communication regarding the status of the investigation. The petitioner made his best efforts to pursue the matter with the concerned SHO. Since no positive information or communication has been provided, the present writ petition has been filed seeking the reliefs as stated supra.

5. Heard and perused the evidence on record. 6. The present writ petition has been registered as WP(Criminal) No.10 of 2025. On examining the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the petition is civil in nature, and a writ of mandamus directing the concerned SHO to take action upon the complaint of the petitioner would suffice. Hence, invocation of the criminal jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is unwarranted.

7. A WP(Civil), as stated, is to be dealt with by a Single Judge having the appropriate roster and not by a Division Bench considering it as a WP(Criminal). Accordingly, this Court directs the Registry to list the matter as per procedure before the concerned Court having WP(Civil) in its roster. 8. With the above observations and directions, the Registry is directed to take steps accordingly.

B. PALIT, J

DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD, J

Suhanjit

SABYASACDigitally signed by SABYASACHI GHOSH HI GHOSHDate: 2025.09.16 15:10:27 +05'30'

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead