Page No.# 1/4 GAHC040017262025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : AB/154/2025 Gyamar Nima retired Deputy Conservator of Forests, Son of Late Gyamar Epo, resident of Damsite Naharlagun. VERSUS The State of AP and 2 Ors represented by the Special PP (ACB) Arunachal Pradesh. 2:The Officer in Charge Age: 0 Occupation : SIC (Vigilance) Police Station Itanagar Papum Pare District 791111 3:Kra Daadi District Forest Protection and Development Committee Age: 0 Occupation : through its President Mr Jamru Tai HQ Palin Kra Daadi District Arunachal Pradesh 79111 Advocate for the Petitioner : Tojam Mossang, Advocate for the Respondent : Ojing Pada, SC (ACB) Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 13.11.2025 Heard Ms. J. Zongluju, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. O. Pada, learned Standing counsel, SCB. 2. By this petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner, namely, Gyamar Nima, has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with SIC (VIG) P.S. P.S. Case No. 06/2021 u/s 409/420/465/471/120(B) IPC r/w section 13 (1)(c)(d) & 13(2) PC Act, 1988. 3. An FIR was lodged before the Officer-in-Charge, SIC (VIG.) Police Station, Itanagar, by the Kra-Daadi District Forest Protection and Development Committee on 24.03.2021 against the accused applicant, who was then serving as the DFO, Kra-Daadi District. The allegation pertains to the nonimplementation of plantation works sanctioned under the NPV and CA components of CAMPA during the years 2013–14 to 2018–19, under the DFO Office, Kurung Kumey District, and the consequent misappropriation of public funds. Based on the said complaint, the aforementioned SIC (VIG.) P.S. Case was registered. 4. It is submitted that although the above FIR was lodged in the year 2021, no investigation was carried out for nearly four years. In the meantime, the applicant retired from service in 2024, but his pensionary benefits have been denied, due to registration of aforesaid SIC (VIG.) P.S. Case against him. Being aggrieved, the applicant has also filed an application before this Hon’ble Court Page No.# 3/4 under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking quashing of FIR No.06/2021, in which notice has already been issued on 12.09.2025. 5. It is further submitted that the accused applicant is innocent of all the allegations made against him. However, recently, after about four years of lodging of the FIR, the Investigating Officer of the case, for the first time, has issued a summon under Section 116 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), requiring the accused applicant to appear before him. The applicant, therefore, has a reasonable apprehension that he may be arrested in connection with the aforesaid SIC (VIG.) P.S. case in order to cause unnecessary harassment. Hence, the applicant prays for grant of pre-arrest bail. 6. The case diary as called for has been received. The accused petitioner was granted interim bail by the order dated 8-10-2025 with conditions and pursuant to which he stated to have appeared before the IO and his statement recorded. 7. The case diary is placed before this Court along with a written narration regarding the findings against the present accused petitioner. The investigation is not yet completed and still in progress. It is submitted by the learned Special P.P., SIC, that the investigation has found sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioner with regard to the allegations of misappropriation of money to the tune of more than Rs 3 crores. It is also submitted by the learned Special P.P., SIC that an earlier bail petition was rejected by this Court on merits after perusal of case diary but the said fact has not been brought to the notice of the court. 8. It is submitted that the investigation has revealed that he has rooted some official documents by taking the signature of one forest guard though only range forest officer is eligible to make those endorsements. The Page No.# 4/4 misappropriation of money was with regard to funds which are meant for some plantations and field verification with regard to the same showed that no plantations were there. Large financial transactions were found in his account. 9. Upon perusing the materials in the case diary and the narration of the I/O regarding the findings against the present petitioner and keeping in mind the fact that investigation is still in progress – granting of anticipatory bail would mean putting fetters on the remaining investigation and the same would not be in the best interest of the remaining investigation. 10. In such view of the matter, the interim bail granted by the order dated 08- 10-2025 stands vacated and the instant bail application stands rejected at this case. It is also submitted by the learned Special P.P., SIC that an earlier bail petition was rejected by this Court on merits after perusal of case diary but the same fact has not been brought to the notice of the court. 11. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant