IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1668 of 2009 DATE:23.06.2010 Between: Mohd. Riaz Mohiuddin …… Revision Petitioner And: Smt.Tajalli Islam and 2 others. …..Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1668 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner who is divorced husband of the 1st respondent/wife and father of the 2nd respondent/son questions awarding of maintenance to the 1st respondent at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month and to the 2nd respondent at the rate of Rs.1,500/- per month by the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge for trial of J.H.C.B.B.C-cum-Additional Family Court, Hyderabad by order dated 11.08.2009 in M.C. No.222 of 2007. Even though several grounds are raised in the memorandum of grounds, the petitioner’s counsel urged only one point to the affect that having regard to the provisions of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, the lower Court should not have granted maintenance in exercise of powers under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Answer for this question does not lie in grey area. It is covered by decision of the Supreme Court in Shabana Bano V. Imran Khan[1] wherein it was held that divorced muslim woman is entitled to claim maintenance from her divorced husband under Section 125 Cr.P.C after expiry of iddat period also, so long as she does not remarry. In so far as the 2nd respondent/minor son is concerned, he is entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C irrespective of the fact whether marriage between his mother and father is subsisting or is severed by divorce. Thus, there are no merits in this revision petition. 2) Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed. _______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J June 23, 2010 KSH [1] 2009(14) SCALE 331