Background: Standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy typically involves the use of four trocars. The fourth trocar, positioned laterally, facilitates the grasping of the gallbladder's fundus, thereby allowing for the exposure of Calot's triangle. As surgeons gain experience, the technique of laparoscopic cholecystectomy has seen. Hence, the present study was conducted for comparative evaluation of three port and four port laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedure. Materials & Methods: The present study included 100 patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The patients were divided into two groups: Three-port group and Four-port group. Both the groups included 50 patients each. Ethical clearance was obtained from the ethical committee of the institution and written consent was obtained from all the patients after explaining in detail the entire research protocol. Patients were randomized to receive either 3-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (3-port group) or conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (4-port group) in a synchronized manner. Outcome was assessed. Results: Mean age of the subjects of the three-port group and four port group was 46.3 years and 44.1 years respectively which was comparable in both the groups. It was observed that 80 percent and 82 percent of the patients of the three-port group and four port group were females. Mean operative time among subjects of the three port group and four port group was 63.8 minutes and 51.7 minutes respectively. Among three-port group, conversion to four port and to open cholecystectomy was seen in 6 percent and 4 percent of the patients respectively while in four-port group, conversion to open cholecystectomy was seen in 2 percent of the patients. On the day of surgery, at 6 hours, the mean VAS for the subjects of the three-port group and for the subjects of the four port group was 5.8 and 7.5 respectively. Significant results were obtained while comparing the mean postoperative VAS score in between two study groups on of surgery at 6 hours. Moreover mean VAS was again significantly higher for the subjects of the four port group on the day of discharge and after one week of follow-up. Conclusion: The three-port technique for laparoscopic cholecystectomy demonstrates a safety profile comparable to that of the conventional four-port approach. Notably, the three-port method offers several benefits, including reduced postoperative pain, enhanced safety, and minimal scarring. However, it is advisable for surgeons to remain open to the option of adding a fourth port if necessary to guarantee the safe execution of the procedure.