ORDER

Dated this the 12^th day of February, 2026 The petitioners are accused Nos.8 and 9 in C.C No.307/2024 on the file of the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery (‘Trial Court’, in short).

2. The petitioners have stated in the Criminal Miscellaneous Case that they were enlarged on bail by the Trial Court. Subsequently, they filed separate applications seeking permanent exemption to resume to their employment abroad. However, by the impugned Annexure A3 order, the Trial Court has rejected the applications on the ground that there is no material to substantiate that the petitioners are employed abroad. Annexure A5 Resident Identity Card clearly reveals that the 1^st petitioner is employed abroad. The 2^nd petitioner is the wife of the 1^st petitioner. Annexure A3 order is erroneous and unsustainable in law. Hence, the Crl.M.C.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. It is not in dispute that the petitioners have not produced Annexure A5 document before the Trial Court. There are also no materials on record to prove that the petitioners are husband and wife. Thus, I do not find any error in Annexure A3 order passed by the