HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA W.P.(Crl)1/2026 Smt. Payel Rani Paul, wife of Sri Samir Das, resident of Anandanagar Para No.2, Acharjee Para, District- West Tripura ----Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Tripura, represented by its Secretary, Home Department, Government of Tripura, New Capital Complex, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District- West Tripura; 2. The Superintendent of Police, West Tripura; 3. The Officer-in-Charge, Srinagar P.S., Anandanagar, West Tripura; ----Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S. Majumder, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Raju Datta, PP Date of hearing & delivery of Judgment & Order : 21.01.2026 Whether fit for reporting : Yes/No HON’BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA Judgment & Order (ORAL) (Dr.T.Amarnath Goud, J) This petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a direction upon the respondents to investigate into the FIR dated 19.12.2025 filed by the petitioner and to arrest the accused persons named in the FIR. 2. Relating to an incident of life threatening attack upon the petitioner, her brother and husband on 16.12.2025, the petitioner lodged a written complaint before the respondent No.3 herein, on 18.12.2025, narrating the entire incident and disclosing the names of the accused persons, which has been registered as Srinagar PS case No. 2025 SRN 026, dated 19.12.2025. After passing of about 4(four) days when no action was taken by respondent No.3 against the FIR named accused persons, the petitioner made a representation to the respondent No.2. Non-action of the respondents prompted the petitioner to file the instant writ petition. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though four days have elapsed, but the respondents failed to act into the complaint made by the petitioner and also failed to cause arrest of any of the FIR named accused persons. Learned counsel, has thus urged this court for a direction upon the respondents for speedy investigation into the matter and also to arrest the FIR named accused persons. 5. Learned PP has submitted that the respondent No.3 has registered a specific case and is investigating the matter. 6. From the record, it is evident that the FIR was registered only on 19.12.2025, but after elapse of only four days of registration of the FIR, the petitioner approached respondent No.2 by a representation with a prayer for arresting the FIR named accused persons, without giving substantial time and without keeping faith upon the Investigating Officer. The Investigating Officer needs a substantial time to collect evidence, record witness statements, and analyze documents. The police have the authority to decide the pace and method of investigation. A few days cannot be considered an "inordinate delay." The petitioner without giving a reasonable scope to the police to investigate into the matter has approached this Court. 7. In the light of above, this Court is of the view that the instant Writ Petition is at its premature stage. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands dismissed to the extent as indicated above. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed. S.DATTA PURKAYASTHA,J DR.T. AMARNATH GOUD,J SAIKAT KAR Digitally signed by SAIKAT KAR Date: 2026.01.21 23:57:50 -08'00'