AMARESH KUMAR SINGH, J.

( 1 ) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the non-petitioner Nos. 2-4.

( 2 ) THIS petition under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code has been filed against the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Pali in Vijay Singh v. Sugan Kanwar and others. By the aforesaid order the learned Sessions Judge, Pali rejected the Revision Petition No. 3/94 filed by Vijay Singh against the grant of interim maintenance allowance to his two minor children and partly allowed the Revision Petition No. 4/94 filed by Smt. Sugan Kanwar. The learned Sessions Judge gave a direction to the Magistrate that he would give a finding about the question whether the customary marriage by Nata is prevalent in the community of parties and whether the non- petitioner No. 2 had been divorced from her husband according to the custom prevalent in the community.

( 3 ) IT appears that a petition under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code was filed in the Court of the learned Magistrate for grant of maintenance under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The learned Magistrate by his order dated 31st January 1994 considered the question of grant of interim maintenance allowance. He refused to grant interim maintenance allowance to Smt. Sugan Kanwar, who alleges that she is legally married wife of petitioner Vijay Singh but the learned Magistrate granted interim allowance to Sajjan Singh and Dharmendra Singh, who minor children of Sugan Kanwar. It is not seriously disputed by Vijay Singh that he is their father. Being aggrieved by the order refusing to grant interim maintenance allowance to her Smt. Sugan Kanwar filed a Revision Petition No. 4/94 and being aggrieved by the order granting interim maintenance allowance to Sajjan Singh and Dharmendra Singh. The petitioner Vijay Singh filed the Revision Petition No. 3/94. The learned Sessions Judge rejected the revision petition filed by Vijay Singh and remanded the case to the Judicial Magistrate so far as the revision petition filed by Smt. Sugan Kanwar was concerned.

( 4 ) IT has not been seriously disputed that Sajan Singh and Dharmendra Singh are the sons of the petitioner Vijay Singh. For the purpose of Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, it is not material whether they are legitimate or illegitimate because illegitimate children are as much entitled to grant of maintenance allowance from the father as the legitimate ones. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner is willing to keep the children with him and, therefore, he cannot he forced to pay maintenance allowance so long the children are not living With him. I am afraid this submission cannot be accepted. Maintenance allowance is granted with a view to save the minor children from starvation and wants, irrespective of the fact whether they are staying with the father or with the mother. Mother is one of the natural guardians of minor children, therefore, staying with the mother and acting under the directions cannot be said to be an act of such nature as may deprive the minor children of the right to obtain maintenance from their father. If the petitioner sincerely wants to keep his sons with him nothing prevents him from filing a petition before the Competent Court for granting him the custody of his minor children in accordance with law. It does not appear that he has moved any, such petition before the Competent Court. In these circumstances grant of interim maintenance allowance to the children appears to be quite just and necessary and no interference by this Court under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is necessary. Consequently, the order of the learned Magistrate granting interim maintenance allowance to non-petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 and the rejection of Criminal Revision Petition No. 8/94 by the learned Sessions Judge, Pali need no interference.

( 5 ) SO far as the decision of the