Tripura High Court grants pre-arrest bail to a doctor accused in a suicide abetment case, holding the dispute to be contractual in nature

High Court of Tripura | Law Notify

News Citation : 2026 LN (HC) 47

Agartala, January 05, 2026 : The Tripura High Court has granted pre-arrest bail to Dr. Partha Bhattacharya, a 64-year-old medical practitioner from Agartala, in a case alleging cheating and abetment of suicide arising out of a failed hospital lease agreement. The order was passed by Justice S. Datta Purkayastha while hearing an application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

Dr. Bhattacharya had approached the High Court after the Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, rejected his anticipatory bail plea in connection with East Agartala Police Station Case No. 116 of 2025. The case was registered on the basis of an FIR lodged by the widow of a businessman who died by suicide in October 2025. She alleged that her husband had invested a large sum of money with Dr. Bhattacharya for setting up a multi-speciality hospital, and that the failure to recover the amount drove him to take his own life.

According to the prosecution, offences under Sections 108, 318(4) and later 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 were attracted, alleging cheating and abetment. The complainant claimed that nearly ₹2.5 crore was taken by the accused and not returned. The defence, however, argued that only ₹1 crore was paid as part of a written Memorandum of Understanding executed in July 2025, and that the transaction was purely contractual in nature.

The Court examined the agreement in detail and noted that it envisaged a refundable security deposit of ₹20 crore to be paid in phases, of which ₹1 crore had been transferred. This amount was admittedly used by the accused to clear an existing bank loan, after which a loan clearance certificate was issued. The Court also took note of the fact that disputes arose later when an engineer engaged by the deceased reported that the building was not structurally suitable for use as a hospital.

Justice Purkayastha observed that, prior to the suicide, there were no allegations of cheating, criminal breach of trust, threats, or instigation against the accused. Even during the initial enquiry following the unnatural death, statements of the informant and close relatives did not point towards abetment. Allegations implicating the petitioner surfaced only several days later, after registration of the FIR, which the Court found to be prima facie an afterthought.

A significant aspect of the judgment dealt with the Court’s power to grant interim protection under the new BNSS. Rejecting the prosecution’s argument that BNSS does not permit interim bail, the High Court held that such power is inherent and flows from the authority to grant anticipatory bail itself. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, including Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and recent orders under the BNSS framework, the Court clarified that interim and ad-interim protection can be granted in appropriate cases.

On merits, the Court concluded that the dispute appeared to be a commercial and contractual disagreement rather than a criminal offence involving mens rea for abetment of suicide. It also noted that the non-bailable warrant issued against the petitioner during the pendency of proceedings did not bar consideration of anticipatory bail, as there was no proclamation declaring him an absconder.

Allowing the application, the High Court directed that Dr. Bhattacharya be released on bail in the event of arrest, upon furnishing a bond of ₹2 lakh with one surety. Conditions were imposed requiring him to cooperate with the investigation, remain within Tripura without permission, refrain from influencing witnesses, and appear regularly before the trial court. The warrant issued earlier was declared infructuous, and the Court clarified that its observations were limited to the bail stage and would not affect the trial.

Case Reference : Partha Bhattacharya v. State of Tripura, AB 89 of 2025, decided on 05 January 2026 (Tripura High Court); Counsel for Petitioner: Samrat Kar Bhowmik, Senior Advocate, E. L. Darlong, N. Das and N. Debnath, Advocates; Counsel for State: Raju Datta, Public Prosecutor.

Scroll to Top