Admit. The learned Public Prosecutor takes notice for the

respondent.

2. The petitioner was issued a passport under directions of this

Court in W.P(C) No.10264 of 2017 vide judgment dated 24.03.2017 at

Annexure-A2. That passport was subsequently renewed vide order

dated 18.09.2018 of the learned Magistrate at Annexure-A3. However,

there was a direction that she shall appear before the Court as and

when required and at any rate she shall surrender her passport on or

before 18.03.2019. Though the validity of the passport was permitted

to be renewed for six months, the Passport Authorities had issued the

passport for one year, and therefore, it was not surrendered on

18.03.2019 inadvertently. Thereafter, the petitioner sought

permission to go abroad and also to renew her passport but vide

impugned order at Annexure-A5 dated 27.09.2019, the learned

Magistrate dismissed her application for the sole reason that she did

not surrender the passport as per Annexure-A3 order on 18.03.2019. It

is now admitted that the petitioner had renewed the passport for one

3

year and before the expiry of that passport she is ready to surrender

it. There were a total of six cases against the petitioner and in five of

them she has been admittedly acquitted and only one case remains

pending. Her husband, who is the first accused is absconding and

reported to be in Gulf. That is the reason why the Court below

rejected her application for issuance of passport.

3. It is pointed out that the petitioner's daughter, who is

studying in 10^th standard in a School at Sharja as is evident from

Annexure-A1. It is submitted that it is crucial for her to be besides her

daughter to complete her education. Hence, she prays that her

passport may be renewed and the order at Annexure-A5 may be set

aside.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted a report of the

Investigating Officer in which it is stated that there is every

possibility that she may go abroad like her husband and may not be

available to face the trial. It is pertinent to note that in all the five

cases in which she was tried, she was available and acquitted by the

Court and one of the cases was compounded in the Addalath also.

Hence, the apprehension that she may abscond is out of place. she has

4

been co-operating with the investigation and the trial so far in five

cases. There is no reason to believe why she should not co-operate in

the trial of the last case pending against her. Under the

circumstances, the petition to renew the passport for a period of one

year and to go abroad to be with her daughter is a reasonable prayer

which needs to be allowed.

This Crl.M.C is therefore allowed as above. The passport is

directed to be renewed for a period of one year. She shall be present

for trial and surrender the passport once she returns from abroad for

the purpose of trial.

Sd/-

ASHOK MENON

JUDGE

SVP

5

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1

A TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD OF THE

DAUGHTER OF THE PETITIONER 'KRISHNA

MADATHIL' FOR THE ACADEMIC YEAR

2019/2020

ANNEXURE A2

A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN

W.P.C.NO.10264/2017 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH

COURT OF KERALA DATED 24.3.2017

ANNEXURE A3

A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CMP

NO.5344/2018 IN CC NO.95/2015 DATED

18.09.2018 OF THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL

FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE -I, KANNUR

ANNEXURE A4

A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION CMP

NO.3816/2019 IN CC.NO.95/2015 FILED BY

THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE COURT OF THE

JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE -I,

KANNUR

ANNEXURE A5

A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN ORDER IN CMP

NO.3816/2019 IN CC NO.95/2015 DATED

27.09.2019 OF THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL

FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE -I, KANNUR

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

Sd/-

PA TO JUDGE