A Chandigarh court has dismissed the third anticipatory bail application of Anubhav Mishra, an outsourced accountant with the Chandigarh municipal corporation (MC), in connection with the alleged misappropriation of Chandigarh Smart City funds, accepting the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) contention that his custodial interrogation was necessary to unearth a larger conspiracy involving the diversion of public money.In his bail application, Mishra claimed he was merely an outsourced accountant with no decision making authority and had only discharged routine clerical duties. (HT File)Mishra is an accused in a case registered by the CBI under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) relating to cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy, along with Section 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.In his bail application, Mishra claimed he was merely an outsourced accountant with no decision making authority and had only discharged routine clerical duties. He argued that the decision to transfer over ₹116 crore from various Chandigarh Smart City Limited (CSCL) bank accounts to the MC’s Smart City account at IDFC First Bank following the company’s closure had been taken by senior officials, including the chief financial officer and additional chief executive officer of CSCL. He maintained that he neither authorised nor benefited from any financial transactions and had been falsely implicated.Opposing the plea, the CBI refuted Mishra’s claim that he had no role in relation to the bank account. While acknowledging that the transfer of funds from CSCL accounts following the company’s closure was a matter of record, the agency submitted that its investigation had revealed Mishra himself initiated the proposal for opening the account, obtained quotations from various banks through electronic mail correspondence and processed the related note sheets. The CBI further alleged that the investigation had uncovered 11 purported fixed deposit receipts aggregating approximately ₹116.84 crore, which were subsequently found to be unsupported by any genuine deposits.The agency further alleged that, after approval from the competent authority, the savings bank account was opened without the account opening form bearing the signatures of the authorised signatories. According to the CBI, this was done by Mishra in connivance with officials of IDFC First Bank to facilitate and subsequently cover up fraudulent transactions carried out through the account.The CBI alleged that three fraudulent debit transactions amounting to ₹8.22 crore and one fraudulent credit transaction of ₹25.28 crore were executed through the account. It claimed the credit originated from Haryana Power Generation Corporation Ltd. and asserted that the transactions were not isolated but formed part of a larger conspiracy involving eight Haryana government departments, allegedly causing a loss of about ₹504 crore to the public exchequer.According to the agency, the probe had also revealed that Mishra dealt with matters relating to Smart City funds and banking records and that his role had emerged from documentary, digital and oral evidence collected during the investigation. The CBI further submitted that the investigation was not confined to the ₹8.22 crore fraudulent debit transactions but extended to the handling of the purported fixed deposit receipts worth ₹116.84 crore, maintenance of fabricated bank statements and concealment of the alleged diversion of public funds.The agency also relied on electronic evidence, alleging that the email ID used by Mishra to obtain quotations from banks even before the account was opened was later linked to the same account through a change request. Similarly, the registered mobile number associated with the account was subsequently changed to a number allegedly used by him. These circumstances, the CBI argued, constituted significant incriminating material requiring detailed custodial interrogation.The CBI maintained that the credits received in the (MC) account were intricately linked to the alleged misappropriation involving eight Haryana government departments and formed part of a larger conspiracy, making custodial interrogation necessary to trace the money trail, identify the role of all conspirators and complete the investigation.After considering the submissions of both sides, the court observed that the allegations pertained to a serious economic offence involving public funds and that the investigation was still at a crucial stage. Accepting the CBI’s contention that custodial interrogation was necessary for a fair and effective investigation, the court dismissed Mishra’s third anticipatory bail application.