The Bombay High Court came down heavily on lower court judges, for blindly rejecting applications of cancellation of arrest warrants when the accused is not present. The High Court, on December 24 2013, ruled that in such situations, orders must be passed on the basis of merit. 

"There is no law stating that the accused should personally remain present for cancellation of a warrant. If the lawyer makes an application for cancellation of a warrant, it needs to be considered on merits by the Magistrate, without insisting the appearance of the applicant or accused," said Justice M L Tahaliyani. 

The court was hearing an application filed by businessman Arun Kumar Chaturvedi, who is an accused in a cheque-bouncing case. Chaturvedi has not attended hearing in his case for the past one and a half years, due to which a non-bailable warrant was issued against him by a magistrate's court in Dadar. 

His lawyer approached the court to cancel the arrest warrant against him, assuring the court that he would be present when the case is heard next. 

But the plea was rejected on December on the grounds that Chaturvedi was not present to cancel his warrant. "Since the applicant was ready to appear before the Magistrate after cancellation of warrant, and there was reasonable apprehension that he might be arrested if he came to court, the Magistrate should have heard the application on the basis of merit," the court observed. 

He further instructed that a copy of this order be circulated to all citybased magistrates. "Many petitions are filed in this court only because the learned Magistrate straightaway takes aview that the warrant cannot be cancelled unless the accused appears before the court. The view taken by a few is not correct. It is high time that this court lets the Magistrate note that the appearance of the applicant or the accused is not necessary when application for cancellation of warrant is made," the court stated.