Crl. Misc. No. M-30368 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-30368 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 04.10.2011 Suresh Kumar alias Kala ....Petitioner Versus Jyoti and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. R.K. Dhiman, Advocate, for the petitioner. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) Record reveals that application seeking interim maintenance during the pendency of the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was rejected by the learned Magistrate vide order dated 25.4.2011. However, order of learned Magistrate, refusing to grant interim maintenance was upset by Revisional Court vide impugned judgment dated 3.9.2011. Revisional Court has directed payment of interim maintenance at the rate of `1,000/- per month to respondent No.1 and at the rate of `250/- per month each to respondents No.2 and 3, minor kids of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that revision against the interim maintenance is not maintainable, therefore, Revisional Court has committed jurisdictional error while allowing the revision against the rejection of interim maintenance application. Crl. Misc. No. M-30368 of 2011 (O&M) -2- I do not agree with the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner for the simple reason that once application seeking interim maintenance was rejected that amounts to final order on the application seeking interim maintenance, therefore, Revisional Court was very well within its jurisdiction while allowing the application. I do not find any illegality in the impugned order. Dismissed. However, petitioner shall be at liberty to raise all the points before the Magistrate while deciding the application at its own merit. (Alok Singh) Judge October 04, 2011 R.S.