1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 1279 of 2008 Date of Decision: 5.11.2009 *** Ravinder Kaur .. Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. A.S. Walia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Sra, Addl. A.G. Punjab None for respondent No.2. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The application of respondent No.2, facing trial in case FIR No. 40 dated 12.6.2004, under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC, Police Station Ghanie Ke Banger, for return of passport and to visit abroad has been allowed by the revisional Court by dint of the impugned order, which initially was dismissed by the learned trial Court. Dis-satisfied with the same the complainant has filed the present revision petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book carefully. It is apt to mention here that Harpreet Kaur, the co-accused and daughter of respondent No.2 was granted permission to fly abroad by virtue of an order dated 1.8.2005 passed by this Court in Crl. Misc. No. 22932-M of 2005, inter alia, on the condition that her parents will furnish an undertaking that until the petitioner therein comes back on or before 30th September, 2005, they will not seek the release of their passports. It has been pointed out by learned State counsel that after completing the formalities, Harpreet Kaur was released her passport and now she is absconding and has been declared proclaimed offender by the learned trial Court. It appears that the rider, as imposed and noticed above, was not 2 brought to the notice of the revisional Court, leading to the passing of the impugned order qua release of passport of respondent No.2, who is none else but mother of Harpreet Kaur and as per direction of this Court, she cannot ask for release of her passport since her daughter and co-accused Harpreet Kaur, who was supposed to come back to India way back in 2005, has evaded the trial and has been declared proclaimed offender. In view of the discussion above, the order dated 10.6.2008 passed by the revisional Court is not sustainable and is accordingly set aside. Revision petition stands allowed accordingly. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE November 5,2009 Jiten