Supreme Court Orders CBI Probe into Arunachal Pradesh Public Contracts; Holds Procurement Irregularities and Missing Records Warrant Independent Investigation

Case Name: Save Mon Region Federation & Anr. v. State of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors.
Citation: 2026 INSC 320
Date of Judgment/Order: 06 April 2026
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vikram Nath; Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Mehta; Hon’ble Mr. Justice N. V. Anjaria

Held: The Supreme Court held that allegations of systemic irregularities in public procurement, including repeated deviation from tender processes, absence of foundational records, and potential conflict of interest involving high public functionaries, justify the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 32 to direct an independent investigation by the CBI to preserve public confidence in governance and ensure accountability under Article 14.

Summary: The case arose from a public interest petition alleging large-scale arbitrariness, favouritism, and nepotism in the award of public works contracts in Arunachal Pradesh, particularly to entities allegedly linked with high-ranking political officials. The petitioners relied on patterns of non-tender awards, missing procurement records, and findings in a CAG report indicating absence of vouchers, tender documents, and decision-making records. The State defended the process by citing geographical constraints, statutory provisions permitting work orders for smaller projects, and statistical insignificance of alleged beneficiaries. The Supreme Court examined the constitutional framework governing public procurement, reiterating that distribution of State largesse must comply with Article 14 and adhere to principles of transparency, fairness, and non-arbitrariness. The Court emphasized that absence of records, repeated departures from competitive bidding, and allegations of related-party benefits raise serious constitutional concerns that cannot be dismissed through general explanations or statistical justifications. It further held that audit findings indicating gaps in documentation and procurement trail, coupled with involvement of high public officials, create a prima facie case warranting independent scrutiny. The Court rejected the State’s reliance on legislative audit processes as a substitute for judicial review and held that where credibility of investigation is in question, entrustment to an independent agency becomes necessary.

Decision: The Supreme Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the CBI to register a preliminary enquiry within two weeks and conduct a time-bound investigation into award and execution of public works contracts in Arunachal Pradesh for the period 01.01.2015 to 31.12.2025; it further directed full cooperation by the State, preservation of all records, appointment of nodal officers, and submission of a status report within sixteen weeks, clarifying that observations are prima facie and shall not affect merits of any subsequent proceedings, with no order as to costs.