The Tripura High Court has ordered a probe into a lower court’s decision to grant bail to six accused in CPI(M) leader Badal Shil’s murder, despite the High Court’s earlier rejection. Justice Biswajit Palit has also issued notices to the accused, questioning the legality of their bail.
The Tripura High Court has ordered a judicial inquiry into the controversial decision of a lower court to grant bail to six accused in the murder of a senior CPI(M) leader, despite the High Court’s earlier rejection of their bail plea.
Justice Biswajit Palit of the High Court directed the Registrar Judicial to conduct the probe, questioning how the Additional District and Sessions Court in Belonia, South Tripura district, granted bail in a case involving serious charges and clear prior orders from the higher court. Notices have also been issued to the six accused, asking them to explain why their bail should not be cancelled.
The Murder of Badal Shil
The case stems from the murder of Badal Shil, a CPI(M) leader and candidate in the 2024 South Tripura Zilla Parishad elections. On July 12, 2024, Shil was reportedly attacked by a group of individuals in the Chottakhola area of South Tripura district. The assault left him gravely injured, and he succumbed to his injuries the following day while undergoing treatment at Agartala Government Medical College and GBP Hospital.
The First Information Report (FIR), lodged by the victim’s daughter, led to the arrest of seven people for their alleged involvement in the politically charged killing.
Initial Bail Proceedings
Following the police investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against the seven accused before the Additional District and Sessions Court in Belonia. All seven moved bail applications, but the sessions court rejected them after assessing the gravity of the crime, the nature of the evidence, and the potential threat to witnesses.
Six of the accused then approached the High Court, challenging the lower court’s decision. However, in March 2025, Justice Palit dismissed their pleas, observing that the evidence against them appeared strong and that there was a risk they might influence the 22 listed prosecution witnesses. The High Court held that granting bail at that stage would not be appropriate.
Controversial Grant of Bail by Lower Court
Despite the High Court’s clear ruling, the six accused once again approached the sessions court, this time arguing that the trial had already begun. On July 25, 2025, the sessions court granted them bail, sparking legal and political uproar.
Defence lawyer Purushottam Roy Barman, who has been representing the victim’s side, told the media that this move amounted to a breach of judicial discipline. “We have pointed out that the sessions court granted bail to the six accused, violating the High Court’s earlier ruling. Granting bail to those facing serious murder charges undermines the judicial process,” he said.
Following this development, Roy Barman raised the matter before the High Court again, leading to Thursday’s order for a formal probe.
High Court’s Strong Response
Justice Palit, after hearing the arguments, tasked the Registrar Judicial with conducting an inquiry into the circumstances and reasoning behind the bail order. The High Court also issued notices to the six accused, requiring them to respond and justify why their bail should not be set aside.
Political Repercussions
The murder of Badal Shil had triggered strong political reactions in Tripura. Both the CPI(M) and the Congress had staged a series of agitations in protest against the killing, calling it a blatant act of political violence ahead of the three-tier Gram Panchayat elections on August 8, 2024. Opposition leaders had accused the ruling dispensation of failing to curb violence against political opponents.
| Also Read: Dacoity turns deadly in Sonamura: Bloodbath leaves 1 dead, 1 critical |
As the judicial probe moves forward, the case has once again brought attention to the functioning of the judicial system in politically sensitive criminal trials. The High Court’s latest move underscores the importance of maintaining consistency and discipline across judicial hierarchies, especially in cases involving grave offences like murder.
