By Firstdespatch Desk Sep 17, 2026
Agartala, Sept 17 (FD) The High Court of Tripura has disposed of a criminal writ petition concerning the alleged assault, humiliation and torture of a man inside East Agartala Police Station in April, while directing strict implementation of the Supreme Court’s CCTV guidelines in all police stations across the state.
The judgment in W.P.(Crl.) No. 06 of 2026, Ratna Roy v. State of Tripura & Others, was delivered on September 17 by a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice Biswajit Palit. The matter was heard on September 1 and the judgment was marked “Fit for Reporting.”
The case arose from an incident on April 4, 2026, when Saikat Saha, son of petitioner Ratna Roy, was allegedly taken to East Agartala Police Station by Rabindranath Ghosh, an Agartala Municipal Corporation employee, and Joy Debnath, described in the judgment as a Special Police Officer. The petitioner alleged that Saha was assaulted, humiliated and tortured inside the police station during the intervening night of April 4 and 5.
CCTV footage from the police station became a key part of the proceedings. The High Court ordered seizure of the footage on May 6 and subsequently constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT), headed by an Inspector General of Police, on May 14 to investigate the allegations.
The SIT submitted its report on June 16. The High Court recorded that the report prima facie supported the allegations against Ghosh and Debnath. The Home Department informed the Court that police personnel of East Agartala Police Station had been issued show-cause notices, suspended and subjected to departmental proceedings.
The Court was subsequently informed that the services of Ghosh and Debnath had been terminated and that a charge sheet had been filed against them before the jurisdictional criminal court. The criminal proceedings remain separate from the writ petition, and the judgment does not record any conviction against either accused.
The Bench observed that the availability of CCTV footage had enabled the Court to intervene effectively in the matter. It contrasted the case with W.P.(Crl.) No. 10 of 2026, Smt. Lipika Lodh v. State of Tripura & Others, where CCTV footage was reportedly unavailable during an alleged assault inside a police station because the system had remained non-functional for several days before and after the incident.
Against this backdrop, the High Court emphasised the need to ensure that CCTV systems in all police stations remain operational at all times.
The Bench relied on the Supreme Court’s December 2, 2020 judgment in Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh & Others, which directed all states and Union Territories to install CCTV cameras in every police station.
The Supreme Court guidelines cover key areas including entry and exit points, main gates, lock-ups, corridors, reception and lobby areas, police officers’ rooms, station halls, areas outside lock-ups, the premises in front of police stations, washroom areas and Duty Officer rooms. The systems must have night-vision capability and record both audio and video.
The High Court also reiterated the requirement for preservation of CCTV footage. Recording systems should be capable of retaining data for 18 months. Where such equipment is unavailable, authorities must procure systems capable of the maximum possible storage period, which cannot be less than one year, with the objective of moving to 18-month storage when suitable equipment becomes commercially available.
In its September 17 judgment, the Bench directed that the Supreme Court’s CCTV guidelines be implemented “in letter and spirit” across Tripura. It specifically placed responsibility for the functioning, maintenance and recording of CCTV systems on the Officer-in-Charge of each police station.
If any camera or recording system becomes non-functional, the Officer-in-Charge must immediately inform the District Level Oversight Committee (DLOC) and provide details of arrests and interrogations conducted during the period of malfunction. The DLOC, in turn, must immediately request the State Level Oversight Committee (SLOC) to arrange repair or replacement of the equipment.
The Court also reiterated the responsibility of senior police authorities to ensure regular monitoring, maintenance, preservation of CCTV data and compliance with the Supreme Court’s directions.
With these observations and directions, the High Court disposed of W.P.(Crl.) No. 06 of 2026, while placing renewed emphasis on functional CCTV surveillance and accountability in police stations across the state. FD JK