Court says allegations of forged signature and suspicious email need forensic scrutiny; directs investigation into whether petitioner’s remaining land was used without acquisition or compensation
Agartala, Sept. 14, 2026: The Tripura High Court has directed a Crime Branch investigation into allegations that land belonging to a woman petitioner was being used for the NH-208 project beyond the area formally acquired by the State, after a dispute arose over the authenticity of a purported signed statement and email said to show her satisfaction with the demarcation process.
Justice Dr. T. Amarnath Goud, hearing WP(C) No. 684 of 2026 filed by Smt. Meri Kalai alias Mary Kalai, noted that the matter involved serious disputed questions of fact, including whether the petitioner had actually signed the document relied upon by the State and whether she had sent the email attributed to her. The Court observed that the petitioner claimed to be illiterate and denied having access to internet facilities, thereby questioning both the signature and the email produced by the respondents.
According to the petition, the petitioner is the lawful allottee and possessor of 0.740 acres of land under Khatian No. 720. Of this, 0.498 acres were acquired under Award No. 1248 dated 21.10.2025, leaving 0.242 acres with her. She alleged that part of the remaining land, which was never acquired, had nevertheless been occupied and used for the NH-208 project without acquisition or payment of compensation. She also sought GPS/geo-tracking survey, physical verification, demarcation of the acquired land, fixation of boundary pillars, and compensation if any portion of her remaining land had been taken.
The State, however, relied on a statement dated 20.08.2026 and an email dated 21.08.2026, contending that a joint verification and demarcation had already been carried out and that the petitioner had expressed satisfaction. The petitioner’s counsel strongly disputed this claim, arguing that the petitioner was not conversant with English and could not have authored the email.
The High Court said the controversy raised a genuine concern that rightful land occupants should not be deprived of their lawful rights, and that any possible role of middlemen or manipulation in the acquisition process must be properly examined. The Court also remarked that such issues required deeper investigation rather than adjudication in writ jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the Court directed the concerned department to assign the matter to a senior officer of the Crime Branch. The officer has been instructed to send the disputed documents for signature verification and cyber forensic examination. After completing the investigation, the Crime Branch officer must submit a report to the concerned District Magistrate and Collector, who will then take further action and decide the petitioner’s grievance in accordance with law.
With these directions, the writ petition was disposed of.
Bottom Line :
Land acquisition - Petitioner alleged that land beyond acquired area was being used for NH-208 Project without acquisition or compensation - Dispute arose regarding genuineness of petitioner's alleged statement and e-mail showing satisfaction about joint verification and demarcation - Held, where serious disputed questions of fact involving signature verification and cyber forensics arise, writ court would not undertake deep factual inquiry and matter deserves investigation by Crime Branch - Concerned department directed to assign matter to senior Crime Branch officer for investigation and report to DM & Collector for further action in accordance with law.
Statutory provision(s): Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950
Smt. Meri Kalai @ Mary Kalai v. State of Tripura, (Tripura) : Law Finder Doc id # 2984446
