BULAN SHIL Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. B. Deb, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. R. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the State and its officers who had submitted the case diary on the earlier date. A part of the record containing parawise comments from the respondents has also been produced before today in this court. In response to Para-5 of the petition, the respondents have stated as follows:

(2.) It is a fact that the petitioner submitted a written complaint before the OC Amtali PS on 28.06.2020 which was received by the duty officer of the Police Station on behalf of the OC PS. The petitioner in her complaint specifically mentioned that a case on matrimonial dispute between her and her husband was pending in the family court. As per report of the OC Amtali PS after submission of the complaint on 28.06.2020, the petitioner verbally requested the duty officer of Amtali PS not to register the case instantly and to allow her 3/4 days time to settle up the dispute with her husband. Since the matter was related to matrimonial dispute, request of the petitioner was considered by the duty officer. This refers Amtali PS GD Entry No.25 dated 28.06.2020. On 02.07.2020 the petitioner again appeared at Amtali PS and told that their matrimonial dispute could not be resolved and she wanted to register a specific case. Accordingly, on 02.07.2020 a specific case was registered at Amtali PS on the complaint of the petitioner vide No.2020AMT059 U/s 447/357/323/506/34 IPC and case was endorsed to W/SI Niva Singha for investigation. Investigation of the case is in progress.

(3.) Such parawise comment is approved by the competent authority and Mr. Datta, learned PP has stated that the veracity of the statement is based on the record. The dispute for non-registration of the case is, therefore, no more exists but at this juncture, Mr. Deb, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the materials as catalogued in the list of articles [Annexure-1 to the writ petition] could not be collected by the petitioner for illegal intervention by some anti-social elements. Mr. Deb, learned counsel has further submitted that in support of the ownership of this materials, the landlord, namely Babul Datta has affirmed a declaration which has been annexed with this petition as Annexure-4. In the said declaration, the landlord has stated inter alia as follows: