What is the ruling on someone who broke their fast while traveling a distance of 600 km, and is obligated to fast two consecutive months as expiation?

Scholars differ on whether continuity of fasting is broken for one who breaks their fast due to an excuse. Some scholars, and this is the madhhab of the Hanbalis, hold that continuity is not broken if one resumes fasting immediately after the excuse is removed. Sheikh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen holds that continuity is not broken if the fast is interspersed with an obligatory fast, an obligatory break from fasting, or a permissible break from fasting. The Permanent Committee holds that an unavoidable breaking of the fast does not break continuity, and likewise travel, if it is for a need and not with the intention of breaking the fast. In contrast, the Hanafis, Malikis, and one opinion among the Shafi’is hold that travel breaks continuity if one breaks their fast during it. If the questioner resumed fasting after their journey, then continuity is not broken according to the first opinion, and they should complete what they have fasted. However, out of consideration for the difference of opinion, it is preferable to resume fasting from the beginning as a precaution.