Petition Disposed: Surety and Security Required for Anticipatory Bail in Arrest Warrant Case by August 26, 2022.

The HC of Madhya Pradesh disposed of the petition challenging the Special Judge's order on the arrest warrant by directing the petitioner to provide surety and security to the Trial Court by 26th August 2022. Upon compliance, the Trial Court was instructed to grant anticipatory bail, ensuring no other legal impediments existed.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to order of Special Judge regarding warrant of arrest in a criminal case.

Analysis:
The High Court of Madhya Pradesh considered a petition challenging an order passed by the Special Judge, CBI, Bhopal regarding the cancellation of a warrant of arrest in a criminal case. The petition was filed under Section 70(2) of the Cr.P.C. The Special Judge had decided to keep the warrant of arrest in abeyance until a future date, as the petitioner accused did not appear when the prosecution filed a charge-sheet for various offenses. The charge-sheet alleged offenses under sections of the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petitioner had cooperated during the investigation, which led to the filing of the charge-sheet on 25.01.2022.

The petitioner's counsel referred to recent judgments of the Apex Court to argue against the necessity of arresting an accused who had cooperated during the investigation solely based on the filing of a charge-sheet. The High Court, after hearing arguments from both parties, concluded that since the petitioner had cooperated during the investigation, arresting the petitioner would serve no purpose. The Court emphasized that the petitioner's cooperation was not disputed by the investigating agency.

As a result, the High Court disposed of the petition with a direction for the petitioner to provide surety and security to the satisfaction of the Trial Court by 26th August, 2022. Upon fulfilling this condition, the Trial Court was instructed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on suitable terms and conditions, provided there were no other legal obstacles. The Court also ordered compliance with the rules regarding copies of the order.

---