The Tripura High Court has upheld the THRC’s recommendation of Rs 4 lakh compensation to the family of prisoner Dilip Debbarma, who died by suicide inside Kendriya Sansodhanagar in October 2024, citing discriminatory treatment and negligence by prison authorities.
The Tripura High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the state government challenging the Tripura Human Rights Commission’s (THRC) recommendation to pay Rs 4 lakh compensation to the widow and children of a prisoner who died by suicide inside Kendriya Sansodhanagar at Bishalgarh in October 2024. The court also upheld the Commission’s findings regarding discriminatory treatment and negligence by prison authorities and directed the state government to implement its recommendations within one month.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice M S Ramachandra Rao and Justice Biswajit Palit delivered the judgment while disposing of a writ petition filed by the Inspector General of Prisons, Tripura. The petition challenged the THRC’s orders dated December 16, 2025, and July 31, 2026.
The deceased prisoner, identified as Dilip Debbarma, was serving a 12-year rigorous imprisonment sentence after being convicted under Sections 366 and 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code. On October 23, 2024, he was found hanging from an exhaust fan inside a toilet adjacent to the interview room at Kendriya Sansodhanagar.
Following the custodial death, the THRC initiated proceedings and examined several documents, including the inquest report, post-mortem examination findings and magisterial inquiry report, to determine the circumstances surrounding the incident.
In its order dated December 16, 2025, the Commission concluded that although the prisoner had died by suicide, the circumstances preceding his death revealed discriminatory treatment and negligence on the part of prison authorities.
According to the Commission’s findings, Debbarma had regularly been assigned the responsibility of cleaning waste from the room where a German Shepherd dog was kept. The Commission observed that no other convict serving rigorous imprisonment had been assigned similar duties, raising concerns over discriminatory treatment and humiliation.
The THRC also identified prima facie negligence by warder Raju Debbarma, who was responsible for supervising the prisoner. The warder allegedly failed to maintain adequate surveillance while Debbarma was carrying out the cleaning work in an area that was not covered by CCTV cameras.
Considering these circumstances, the Commission observed that the treatment and negligence had contributed to the prisoner’s depression and eventual suicide. It consequently recommended Rs 4 lakh compensation for his widow, Durpati Debbarma, and their children. The Commission also recommended departmental proceedings against the concerned warder and other prison personnel over alleged dereliction of duty and discriminatory practices.
The prison authorities subsequently sought reconsideration of the findings, relying on a magisterial inquiry report that had concluded the death was a suicide and found no evidence of negligence or foul play by prison personnel.
However, the High Court rejected the state’s arguments, clarifying that an inquiry conducted under Section 196 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, was limited to determining the apparent cause of death. The Bench observed that such an inquiry did not extend to examining the broader circumstances of the incident or fixing responsibility for negligence.
The court further held that the Judicial Magistrate had no jurisdiction to record findings concerning alleged negligence by prison authorities and that such observations could not invalidate the THRC’s conclusions.
| Also Read: PM Modi to Virtually Inaugurate Eklavya Residential School in Tripura’s Dhalai |
The Bench also examined the Commission’s powers under Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, and held that its recommendations were binding on the state government, subject to judicial review. It noted that the government had received the Commission’s order on February 25, 2026, but approached it for reconsideration only on July 10, 2026. Consequently, the rejection of the review request as time-barred was also upheld.
| Also Read: Tripura HC Grants Five Advance Increments to PhD-Holding Prof |
Finding no valid grounds to interfere with the Commission’s recommendations, the High Court dismissed the state government’s petition and directed the authorities to implement the THRC’s directions within one month. The authorities were also instructed to submit a compliance report to the court.
The judgment reinforces the importance of accountability, non-discriminatory treatment and proper supervision within correctional institutions, particularly in cases involving custodial deaths and the protection of prisoners’ human rights.
