Interim order: Petitioner must attend CBI summons, no coercive action. Clarification needed before potential accusation.

The Court issued an interim order directing the petitioner, who had been granted pardon in ED proceedings, to attend CBI summons with prior notice and restrained coercive actions until the next hearing. The Court acknowledged the complexity of the ongoing investigation and the need for further clarity before making a conclusive decision on whether the petitioner could be made an accused by CBI based on the same facts.

---

---

Issues involved:
1. Whether a person granted pardon in ED proceedings can be made an accused by CBI based on the same facts.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought various reliefs, including guidelines for protection after being accepted as an "approver" under PMLA and granted pardon by the Special Court. The petitioner, brother-in-law of an accused, was made an approver in an ED case after cooperating with investigations. The main contention was that once pardoned by ED, CBI cannot arraign him as an accused. The petitioner faced issues at the airport due to a Look Out Circular.

2. The central issue was whether the petitioner, granted pardon in ED proceedings, could be made an accused by CBI based on the same facts. The petitioner's counsel cited relevant judgments, emphasizing the protection granted post-pardon. The CBI challenged the petitioner's travel permission after deciding to make him an accused, leading to a stay order by the Court.

3. The Special Public Prosecutor argued that investigation prerogatives lie with the CBI, distinct from ED's PMLA cases. He highlighted that CBI's investigation was ongoing, without a final decision on making the petitioner an accused. The prosecutor deemed the petition premature due to the evolving investigation status.

4. The Court issued notices to respondents, setting a returnable date. An interim order directed the petitioner to attend CBI summons with prior notice and restrained coercive actions until the next hearing. The Court acknowledged the ongoing investigation's complexity and the need for further clarity before making a conclusive decision.

---