The Supreme Court on Monday granted anticipatory bail to retired Nagaland district judge Inalo Zhimomi, who claimed he was being maliciously prosecuted and forcibly retired after raising concerns about the cash surety system in Nagaland’s district judiciary, NDTV reported.
Zhimomi, formerly the Principal District and Sessions Judge of Mon district, is facing accusations of misappropriating Rs 14.35 lakh—money deposited as cash sureties for bail in criminal cases. The police case was filed following a complaint by the current Principal District and Sessions Judge, who alleged that the amount had gone missing during Zhimomi’s tenure.
The retired judge, however, has claimed that his removal from service and the subsequent criminal proceedings were acts of retaliation for exposing administrative irregularities in Nagaland’s bail system. In his plea to the apex court, he alleged that the prosecution against him was in violation of constitutional safeguards and judicial conventions, particularly the Supreme Court’s 1991 ruling that requires prior consultation with the Chief Justice before initiating criminal proceedings against a judicial officer.
Zhimomi highlighted that in Nagaland, cash surety is required for bail as the state does not follow a conventional bail bond system like other Indian states. He had earlier flagged in 2013—while serving as the Chief Judicial Magistrate in Kohima—that such amounts were not being deposited in the District Treasury, a practice he claimed is “systemically flawed.”
A 2024 internal audit, carried out under the Gauhati High Court’s direction, found that Rs 14.35 lakh was missing from 29 bail cases recorded in the official register. The Principal District Judge of Dimapur had submitted a written statement confirming the missing amount. This eventually led to the criminal complaint against Zhimomi and two others.
Zhimomi approached the Supreme Court after the Gauhati High Court’s Kohima Bench, on May 29, declined to grant him interim relief without delving into the merits of the case. In his Supreme Court petition, he described his compulsory retirement as “illegal” and argued that the post-retirement disciplinary proceedings initiated against him contravened the Nagaland Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules.
Calling the missing money “a symptom of systemic issues in Nagaland’s subordinate judiciary,” Zhimomi alleged a “clear pattern of malicious prosecution” which included suspension, forced retirement, disciplinary action, and now criminal charges—targeting him for raising red flags about the non-transparent handling of bail funds.
He also criticised the Gauhati High Court for failing to investigate the broader administrative issue, saying the court’s silence on whether bail money was being deposited in district treasuries “clearly demonstrates the issue… has not been properly looked into.”
While the Supreme Court granted Zhimomi anticipatory bail, the court clarified that the matter would continue to be heard by the High Court.
Zhimomi was represented by Advocate-on-Record Aditya Giri and Senior Counsel S. Borgoahain.
(With inputs from NDTV)