Hon’ble Pankaj Naqvi, J.—Heard Sri Sumit Goyal, learned counsel for revisionist and Ms. Anjum Haq, learned A.G.A.

“Whether an unmarried major Muslim daughter who is unable to maintain herself, can claim maintenance from her father under Section 125 Cr.P.C, is an issue which has fallen for consideration in this revision.”

Ms. Anjum/O.P. No. 2, daughter of the revisionist, claimed maintenance from her father under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The trial Court on 30.6.2007 granted maintenance @ Rs. 1000/- per month, which was paid for certain duration. However, as maintenance awarded, was insufficient to maintain O.P. No. 2, she filed an application for enhancement which came to be rejected on 28.5.2013 on the ground that after she had attained majority, she forfeits her right to claim maintenance. On 14.5.2013 as arrears of Rs. 12000/- for the period 31.5.2012 to 31.5.2013 remained unpaid, she initiated proceedings for recovery of the said amount. The application was opposed on the ground that once she had attained majority on 10.3.2011, she is not entitled to claim maintenance. The Principal Judge (Family Court), Saharanpur dismissed the objection of the father on 16.9.2004 on the ground that the liability of a father to maintain his daughter under Section 125 Cr.P.C, continues till her marriage, which is impugned herein.

2. It is urged on behalf of revisionist that the liability of a father to maintain a daughter under Section 125 Cr.P.C. continues till such time, she has not attained majority and the view taken by the Court below is in the teeth of the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Amarendra Kumar Paul v. Maya Paul and others, 2009(3) SCC (Crl.) 868 and that of this Court in the case of Amod Kumar Srivastava v. State of U.P. and others, 2008 (62) ACC 591.

3. Per contra, learned A.G.A. would submit that the view taken by the Court below is sustainable in law and the revision is liable to be dismissed.

4. An issue similar, to the one raised herein, came up for consideration before the Apex Court in the case of Noor Saba Khatoon v. Mohd. Quasim, 1997 (6) SCC 233. For ready reference, the issue is extracted hereunder:

1. Short but interesting question involved in this appeal, by special leave, is whether the children of Muslim parents are entitled to grant of maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for the period till they attain majority or are able to maintain themselves whichever date is earlier or in the case of female children till they get married or is their right restricted to the grant of maintenance only for a period of two years prescribed under Section 3(1)(b) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 notwithstanding Section 125 Cr.P.C.”

5. The Apex Court after analyzing the scheme of Section 125 Cr.P.C. and that of the personal law, held that both under the personal law and the statutory law (Section 125 Cr.P.C.), the obligation of a Muslim father, having sufficient means, to maintain his minor children, unable to maintain themselves, is to last till they attain majority and in case of females till they get married. The precise answer returned by the Apex Court is extracted in paragraph 11 as hereunder :

11. Thus, our answer to the question posed in the earlier part of the opinion is that the children of Muslim parents are entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125, Cr.P.C. for the period till they attain majority or are able to maintain themselves, whichever is earlier, and in case of females, till they get married, and this right is not restricted, affected or controlled by divorcee wife’s right to claim maintenance for maintaining the infant child/children in her custody for a period of two years from the date of birth of the child concerned under Section 3(1)(b) of the 1986 Act. In other words Section 3(1)(b) of the 1986 Act does not in any way affect the rights of the minor children of divorced Muslim parents to claim maintenance from their father under Section 125, Cr.P.C. ti