AB/76/2026 of Nirmal Sharma Choudary Vs The State of AP on 20 July 2026

ORDER

21.07.2026

Heard Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel for the accused applicant and Mr. O. Pada, learned Standing Counsel, Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB, for short).

2. This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS, for short) seeking grant of pre- arrest bail apprehending arrest in connection with ACB P.S. Case No. 04/2026 registered under Sections 120(B)/ 409/ 420/ 467/471 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

3. On 03.07.2026, this Court called for the case diary. The case diary has been produced and perused.

4. The prosecution case is that a written complaint was lodged alleging large-scale irregularities in the execution of two PMGSY road projects under the Rural Works Department, Changlang Division, including alleged misappropriation of Government funds, incomplete execution of works despite release of payments, and issuance of a completion certificate in respect of an incomplete project. On the basis of the complaint, the aforesaid case came to be registered and investigation is in progress.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the relevant period the applicant was functioning as Cashier-in-Charge under the establishment of the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Changlang Division, due to non-posting of a regular cashier. It is submitted that the applicant retired from service on 31.01.2026 on attaining the age of superannuation.

6. It is further submitted that the applicant had no role in the execution or supervision of the works, recording of measurements, preparation of Measurement Books, award of contracts or issuance of completion certificates. According to the learned counsel, payments were processed only on the basis of bills duly passed and approved by the competent authority and the applicant merely discharged the duties attached to the post assigned to him. It is also submitted that the applicant is willing to cooperate with the investigation.

7. Learned Standing Counsel, ACB submits that the applicant was functioning as Cashier-in-Charge during the relevant period. It is also submitted that the applicant was not the authority responsible for execution of the work, recording of measurements or issuance of completion certificates. However, according to the prosecution, investigation is still in progress.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that a co-accused, the Executive Engineer, in the same case has already been granted anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court and, therefore, the applicant claims parity.

9. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the case diary. The materials collected during investigation prima facie disclose allegations relating to financial irregularities in the execution of PMGSY works. At the same time, the materials presently available indicate that the role attributed to the present applicant is limited to his functioning as Cashier-in-Charge. The applicant has already retired from service. The prosecution has also not disputed that he was not entrusted with the execution of the works, recording of measurements or issuance of completion certificates.

10. Having regard to the nature of the allegations, the role attributed to the applicant, the materials available in the case diary, the fact that a co- accused has been granted anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench, and considering that the investigation can proceed even while protecting the liberty of the applicant by imposing appropriate conditions, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary at this stage.

11. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant, namely Shri Nirmal Sharma Choudary, in connection with ACB P.S. Case No. 04/2026, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two surety of the like amount one of which shall be a residence of Arunachal Pradesh to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 (ten) days from today and shall thereafter cooperate with the investigation as and when required;

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly induce, threaten or promise any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing the facts to the Investigating Officer or the Court;

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness or otherwise hamper the investigation;

(iv) The applicant shall not leave the State of Arunachal Pradesh without prior intimation to the Investigating Officer during the pendency of the investigation.

12. It is made clear that in the event of violation of any of the above conditions or non-cooperation with the investigation, it shall be open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of the pre-arrest bail in accordance with law. The application stands disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE CHECKED & VERIFIED Digitally signed by Talom Tali Date: 2026.07.22 13:39:55 +05'30'