JUDGMENT 1. - This petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the order dated 19.6.93 of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge No. 2, Baran, passed in Criminal Revision No. 11/92 (7/92). The petitioner is the husband. In a petition under section 125 Cr.P.C., the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baran vide his impugned order dated, 5.6.92 awarded Rs. 500/- per month as maintenance to the wife and Rs. 500/- per month as maintenance to two minor children at the rate of Rs. 250/-per month. The order of maintenance was passed from the date of application. 2. The revision petition preferred against the order dated, 5.6.92 was dismissed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge on 19.6.93. Hence, this petition under section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed. 3. Two-fold contentions have been raised before me. The first contention is that the income of the petitioner has not been properly assessed by the courts below. The second contention is that the maintenance should have been awarded from the date of order. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the wife (non- petitioner No. 1) contends that this petition under section - 482 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable as the petitioner had one right of revision which has been already availed by him. After dismissal of the revision petition, he cannot be permitted to challenge the order of the revisional court in view of express bar under sub-section (3) of Section 397 Cr.P.C. Otherwise also, learned counsel contended that none of the contentions raised by the petitioner is tenable. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find that the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the non-petitioners have merit. The petitioner has already exercised his right of revision and unless a case of gross injustice is found or a case of total lack of jurisdiction is found, normally, no interference should be made by this Court in view of the express bar contained in sub-section (3) of Section-397 Cr.P.C. So far as the income of the petitioner is concerned, suffice it to say that both the courts below have estimated the income of the petitioner as Rs. 5,000/- to 6,000/-per month. No appreciation of evidence can be made by this Court. 5,000/- to 6,000/-per month. No appreciation of evidence can be made by this Court. The courts below had jurisdiction to award maintenance from the date of application and no interference can be made by this Court at this stage in exercise of the powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. The award of maintenance allowance of Rs. 500/- to the wife and Rs. 250/- P.M. to each of the two minor children cannot be said to be excessive in these days of high cost of living. The petitioner has a legal and moral duty to maintain his wife and the children and if he neglects, he must pay the maintenance and no leniency can be shown to him. 6. Consequently, I do not find any merit in this petition and the same is hereby dismissed.The record of the trial court may be sent back immediately. *******