The court emphasized the purpose of granting interim maintenance to ensure the claimant's survival until the final adjudication of the petition under Section 488 Cr.P.C. and reiterated the husband's liability to provide maintenance even after divorce.

1. This petition under Section 561-A Cr.P.C. has been preferred seeking quashing of judgment and order dated 18.08.2015 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, in file No. 58/Rev. titled ‘Tariq Mehmood Bhat Vs. Zubaida Akhtar and anr.’ whereby criminal revision petition against order dated 07.08.2014 filed by the respondent was partly allowed to the extent of interim maintenance granted under Section 488 Cr.P.C in favour of petitioner No.1 has been ordered fresh consideration by the trial Court and upheld the impugned order in so far it pertains to petitioner No.2. Petitioners also seek modification of order dated 07.08.2014 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class (Sub Judge) Jammu by enhancing the interim maintenance.

2. Facts giving rise to the instant petition are that the respondent had solemnized marriage with petitioner No.1 as per Muslim rites and ceremonies; that out of the said wedlock, one male child namely Mohd. Muzamil (petitioner No.2) was born on 22.05.1998, who is residing with petitioner No.1 since his birth at Mohalla Ustad, Jammu; that at the time of marriage, respondent was unemployed and soon after the marriage, respondent along with petitioner No.1 were thrown out of the house of respondent by the parents of respondent and it was the parents of the petitioner No.1 who provided protection and shelter to the respondent and petitioner No.1; that respondent and petitioner Nos.1 & 2 resided at the parental house of petitioner No.1 for more than five years and subsequently the parents of the petitioner No.1 arranged a rental accommodation in Mohalla Ustad, Jammu and the expenses of all three were being met by the parents of petitioner No.1 including the education expenses of petitioner No.2; that in the year 1998, respondent was recruited in Police Department and thereafter he started harassing petitioner No.1 and on one fine morning without telling anything to petitioner No.1, the respondent left the rental accommodation at Mohalla Ustad, Jammu and later on it came to the knowledge of petitioner No.1 that he had gone to Rajouri and had managed to get transferred there; that respondent told the petitioner No.1 that if she wants to continue with the respondent, she will have to transfer the title and ownership of lad, which petitioner No.1 got with the help of financial assistance provided by her brother and sisters, in the name of respondent otherwise she would have to face bad consequence of it; that after refusing to transfer the land by petitioner No.1, respondent told the petitioners that he has no need of petitioners and it came to the knowledge of petitioner No.1 is going to solemnize a second marriage and thereafter just to harass petitioner No.1 respondent sent a legal notice on 22.05.2010 to petitioner No.1 and after proper reply by petitioner No.1, respondent did not communicate further and filed two cases at Rajouri against petitioner No.1, one for restitution of conjugal rights and another for custody of minor son i.e. petitioner No.2; that thereafter petitioner No.1 filed two civil transfer applications (CTA Nos. 27/2013 & 28/2013) before this Court to transfer the case from Rajouri to any Court of competent jurisdiction at Jammu, in which, this Court stayed the proceedings in the above two cases till disposal of the CTAs; that after the proceedings in the above mentioned cases having been stayed by this Court, the respondent made another attempt to harass the petitioners by sending ‘Divorce/Talaknama’ dated 29.08.2013; that she filed a suit for declaration declaring the said Talaknama as null and void, in which the operation of the said document was stayed. Subsequently, the stay was vacated; that petitioner No.1 has filed an appeal in the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Jammu, in which the stay has been granted; that petitioner No.1 being a housewife has no earning and petitioner No.2 is a minor studying in 11th class, whereas respondent is getting