1. Smt. Yashodha Devi filed an application under Section 125 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, in the Court 6f Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jullundur, claiming maintenance from her married daughter Raj Kumari. Mst. Raj Kumari opposed the petition and her main contention was, that Mst. Yashodha Devi had no right to claim maintenance from her. The Magistrate held that Mst. Yashodha Devi, as a mother, had a right to claim maintenance from her daughter. Mst. Raj Kumari filed a revision petition against the order of the Magistrate which was heard by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Jullundur. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jullundur held that the revision petition did not lie and sent the case back to the trial court for deciding the same according to law. Mst. Raj Kumari has filed this application under Section 482, Cr. P. C. for quashing the maintenance proceedings filed against her.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the provision for the payment of maintenance allowance to the father or the mother, who are unable to maintain himself or herself, has been made in the Cr. P. C. of 1973 (hereinafter called the Code) and the liability for the sam