The Tripura High Court has declined to quash two FIRs and the corresponding charge-sheets against content creator Madhabi Biswas Chakraborty, observing that the allegations made in the complaints, at this stage, disclose a prima facie case requiring further investigation.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Dr. T. Amarnath Goud and Justice S. Datta Purkayastha delivered the judgment on August 12, 2026.
Background of the Case
The petitioner had approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, and Article 21, seeking quashing of FIRs registered at East Agartala and West Agartala Police Stations.
The cases arose from complaints alleging that certain social media content contained derogatory and critical remarks concerning the Prime Minister, the Mayor of Agartala and Mata Tripureshwari. The petitioner, however, maintained that she had merely expressed her opinion and that the allegations did not satisfy the ingredients of criminal defamation under Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
She also alleged that the proceedings were politically motivated and that the investigation was incomplete.
Court’s Observation
The Bench noted that social media has become an important means of communication, but also observed that false or defamatory material can quickly affect a person's reputation.
The Court remarked that, prima facie, the comments attributed to the petitioner appeared to go beyond protected expression and could constitute defamation. It also stressed that freedom of speech does not provide unrestricted protection to defamatory or malicious content.
Importantly, the Court held that while examining a petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings, it cannot conduct a mini-trial or assess the correctness of the allegations in detail.
“The task of the High Court, when called upon to adjudicate an application seeking to quash the proceedings, is to see whether, prima facie, an offence is made out or not,” the Bench observed.
The Court further noted that the investigating officer had seized the petitioner's mobile phone, but the relevant video clips or screen recordings had not yet been produced. Therefore, the investigation could not be treated as complete.
Decision
The High Court refused to quash the FIRs and charge-sheets at this stage. It directed the Investigating Officer to conduct further investigation and submit a supplementary charge-sheet before the trial court under Section 193(9) of the BNSS.
The Court clarified that, after receiving the supplementary charge-sheet, the trial court would proceed in accordance with law, while the petitioner would remain at liberty to raise her contentions before the trial court.
Case Details
Case Title: Madhabi Biswas Chakraborty @ Madhavi Biswas Chakraborty @ Moon Moon Biswas v. State of Tripura & Anr.
Case Number: W.P.(Crl.) No. 8 of 2026 and W.P.(Crl.) No. 9 of 2026
Judge: Justice Dr. T. Amarnath Goud and Justice S. Datta Purkayastha
Decision Date: 12 August 2026
 chief. Eknath Shinde – Shiv Sena leader-300x169.webp)
