ORDER
Narain Singh “Azad”, J.
1. Arguments heard.
2. On consideration of certified copy of order dated 13th October, 2000, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Harda, on bail application of this petitioner and two others namely Jitendra Kumar and Dhiraj Kumar, it is noted that on a complaint filed on behalf of respondent No. 2, cognizance for offences punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 420 of the IPC was taken against this petitioner on 16th July, 1997, and on the same day, the petitioner was ordered to be called by bailable warrant of Rs. 1,00,000/-. This bailable warrant could not be served for a long time and therefore, the same was published in daily newspaper for petitioner’s attendance on 14th December, 1999. Thereafter, on 27-1-2000, Shri R.C. Sharma, Advocate, appeared in Court on behalf of this petitioner to whom, the copy of the complaint and documents filed along with the complaint were supplied. It was also directed that the petitioner be kept in attendance on the next date of hearing, for executing personal bond worth Rs. 1,00,000/- and a surety bond
in the like amount, but he did not attend the Court on 18-2-2000, 25-2-2000 and 27-3-2000. Nor the bonds were executed, as ordered.
3. Then, on 1-4-2000, an application was moved on behalf of this petitioner with a prayer that the personal bond may be permitted to be executed in the absence of the petitioner, who has fallen ill. This application stood rejected by the Trial Court, which ordered the issuance of warrant of arrest.
4. It is also noted that an application under Section 482 of the Cr.PC was moved on behalf of this petitioner in this Court, which was registered as M.Cr.C. No. 2653/2000, with a prayer of quashment of criminal complaint, filed on behalf of respondent No. 1 against this petitioner. On rejection of aforesaid M.Cr.C. No. 2653/2000 by this Court, the petitioner moved the Supreme Court for Special Leave to Appeal. This petition which was registered as Criminal No. 4139/2000, also stood dismissed.
5. Since on account of absence of petitioner in the Trial Court, warrant of arrest is ordered to be issued and earlier to this order the petitioner was afforded the relief of bail, this petition seeking anticipatory bail is not maintainable, as dictated by this Court in Yogendra Singh v. State of M.P., reported in 2000(1) M.P.H.T. 409.
6. Consequently, this petition stands rejected being not maintainable.