Justice M. L. Tahaliyani, in his ruling, stated that there is no legal requirement for the accused to personally appear for a warrant cancellation. He criticized the approach of some magistrates, particularly in Bombay, for insisting on the accused’s appearance for warrant cancellation. The judge emphasized that the magistrate should consider cancellation applications on their merits, even if made by the accused’s lawyer.

Original contents of the judgment start from here
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION  WRIT PETITION  NO. 4429 OF  2013 Arunkumar N. Chaturvedi ..Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr ..Respondents Mr.Rishi Bhuta,for the Petitioner. Mr. A. R. Patil, APP,for the Respondent State.   CORAM :­ M. L. TAHALIYANI, J. DATE     :­ DECEMBER 24, 2013.  
  1. Heard the learned counsel Mr. Rishi Bhuta for the Petitioner and the learned Additional P. P. Mr. Patil, for the State of Maharashtra.
  2. The Applicant is accused no.2 in Criminal Case No.1304/SS/2006 pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, 7th Court, Dadar for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The warrant has been issued against the Applicant as he was absent on the   date   of   hearing.   The  Applicant   had   applied   for  cancellation   of warrant through his advocate.  It is submitted that the application has been rejected by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate on the ground that the Applicant was not present when the application for cancellation of warrant was made before the Magistrate.
  3. The   judgments   of   Andhrapradesh   High   Court   and   Delhi   High Court were cited before the learned Magistrate.  The learned Magistrate without considering those judgments has stated that the said judgments were not binding upon him.
  4. Since the Applicant was ready to appear before the Magistrate after   cancellation   of   warrant   and   since   there   was   reasonable apprehension in the mind of the Applicant that he might be put beyond the bars if he appeared before   cancellation of warrant, the learned Magistrate should have considered the application on merits.
  5.  In my considered opinion, there is no law that the accused shall personally remain present for cancellation of warrant.   If the lawyer makes an application for cancellation of warrant, the same needs to be considered on merits by the learned Magistrate without insisting the for appearance of the Applicant/accused.   It is noted by this Court that many Writ Petitions are filed in this Court   only because the learned Magistrate straight way   take a view that warrant cannot be cancelled unless accused appears before the Court.  The view taken by a few of the Magistrates particularly in the city of Bombay, in my opinion, is not correct. It is high time that this Court lets the Magistrate note that  the appearance of the applicant/accused is not necessary when application for cancellation of warrant is made.   In the circumstances, I pass the following order:­
(I) The   non­bailable   warrant   issued   against   the   Applicant   stands cancelled. (II) The Applicant shall appear before the Trial Court on next date of hearing. (III) The   copy   of   this   order     shall   be   forwarded   to   the   Chief Metropolitan   Magistrate,   Bombay   for   being   circulated   to   all   the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and Metropolitan Magistrate. (IV) The Writ Petition stands disposed of. ( M. L. TAHALIYANI , J.)