A warrant of arrest can be kept in abeyance to allow a petitioner to surrender and apply for bail, with the trial court required to decide the bail application impartially.

Headnote:
BAIL - WARRANT OF ARREST - The court addressed the conversion of a warrant of arrest into a bailable warrant, emphasizing the importance of allowing the petitioner to surrender and apply for bail. The court referenced precedent law to support its decision, ultimately deciding to keep the warrant in abeyance for three weeks, ensuring the trial court would handle the bail application impartially.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to convert a warrant of arrest into a bailable warrant, expressing readiness to surrender and apply for bail in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Finding of the Court:

The court acknowledged the petitioner's willingness to surrender and considered the legal precedent cited, deciding to keep the warrant in abeyance for three weeks to facilitate the bail application process.
Issues: Whether the warrant of arrest should be converted into a bailable warrant and the implications of the petitioner's surrender on the bail application.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on established legal principles regarding bail and the handling of warrants, ensuring that the trial court would decide the bail application based on the law without bias.
Result: The warrant of arrest was kept in abeyance for three weeks, allowing the petitioner to surrender and apply for bail, with the condition that failure to do so would nullify the order.

JUDGMENT

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - In wake of second surge in the COVID-19 cases, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in Court, for the safety of all concerned.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner limits his argument that the warrant of arrest issued by the learned Court below be converted into bailable warrant, and that the petitioner is ready and willing to surrender before the learned trial court and apply for bail.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the precedent law laid down by the Hon ble Apex Court in Inder Mohan Goswami & Another Vs. State of Uttaranchal & Others, (2008) AIR SC 251.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the aforesaid submission made on behalf of the petitioner.

5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties as well as perusing the record of the case alongwith the precedent law cited at the Bar, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that the warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner vide order dated 20.02.2020 shall be kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks to enable the petitioner to surrender before the trial court and apply for bail.

6. Needless to say that the trial court shall decide the bail application of the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of law without being influenced by any observation made herein above this Court.

7. It is clarified that in case, the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned court within the stipulated period of three weeks from today, the present order shall cease to operate and law shall take its own course.

8. Stay petition also stands disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document