JUDGMENT 1. - This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 2-8-91, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge allowed the revision petition filed by Jaida and set-aside the order dated 28-4-89, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Chittorgarh. 2. Applicant Smt. Jaida, on 31-5-88, filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chittorgarh, for the grant of maintenance for herself as well as for her minor son Moinuddin. The learned Magistrate, after trial, came to the conclusion that the non-applicant (husband) has not treated the wife with cruelty and has not turned her out from his house and as she is living separately from the husband without any justified reasons, therefore, she is not entitled for any maintenance. The learned Magistrate, also, opined that she is an earning lady and earns about Rs. 15/- to Rs. 20/- per day and, therefore, she has sufficient means to maintain herself as well as to her minor son. Dissatisfied with the judgment dated 284-89, dismissing the application filed by the applicants, Mst. Jaida filed a revision petition, which was allowed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh, who, while allowing the revision petition, set-aside the order dated 28-4-89 and remanded the case to the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chittorgarh, to decide the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. afresh in accordance with the directions issued by him. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has not finally disposed of the case and has not awarded the maintenance to the wife. He has merely directed the trial Court to re-determine the case. Under the Muslim Law, it is the obligation of the father alone to maintain his son till he attains the age of majority and in the case of girl till she is married. It is the duty of the father to maintain the children if he is not indigent or the children are in the custody of the mother. No-one shares this obligation with him. The learned Magistrate dismissed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the wife only on the ground that the mother is in a position to maintain herself as well as to her minor son. 3. No-one shares this obligation with him. The learned Magistrate dismissed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the wife only on the ground that the mother is in a position to maintain herself as well as to her minor son. 3. According to Muslim Personal Law, as well as under Section 125 Cr.P.C., it is the obligation of the father to provide maintenance to his minor children. It is an absolute obligation, not shareable with any person. In Hamilton's Hedaya, a classical work on Muslim Law (Volume I) Book No. 4 (1791 Edition), in Chapter XV (Sec. 4) at page 408, it is stated : The maintenance of infant children rests upon their father; and no person can be his associate or partner in furnishing it (in the same manner as no person is admitted to be associated with a husband in providing for the maintenance of his wife) because the word of GOD, in the Koran says THE MAINTENANCE OF THE WOMAN WHO 'SUCKLES AN INFANT RESTS UPON HIM TO WHOM THE INFANT "IS BORN", (that is, upon the father) from which it appears that the maintenance of an infant child so rests upon the father, because, as maintenance is decreed to the child with her milk, it allows that the same is due to the child himself, fortiori." 4. The rejection of the application for the grant of maintenance by the learned Judicial Magistrate was, therefore, not proper. Though the learned Additional Sessions Judge has allowed the revision on other grounds and remanded the case for re- determination but the order can be sustained on this count, also. The order, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, remanding the case to the trial Court, therefore, does not require any interference. No illegality appears to have been committed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. 5. In the result, I do not find any merit in this revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed.Petition dismissed. *******