SAURABH SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Crl. M.A. 19422/2013 (exemption),

(2.) I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the impugned order.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits' that there are no arrears of maintenance and same has been wrongly mentioned in the impugned order. It is stated that petitioner has to travel to USA and Singapore and in that connection requires his passport and he will come back on 15.02.2014 and thereafter, the petitioner will re-deposit the passport with the I.O.