Judgment ( 1 ) THIS criminal revision petition under Section 397/401 cr. P. C. , is directed against the judgment and order dated 20. 2. 2006 passed by Judge, Family Court, Udaipur (for short the family court hereinafter) whereby the trial court awarded maintenance @ Rs. 500/- and Rs. 300/- per month in favour of non-petitioner No. 2 wife and non-petitioner No. 3 son respectively and @ Rs. 200/- per month in favour of Miss Anita on an application filed by non-petitioners No. 2 and 3 under section 125 Cr. P. C. Aggrieved by the order impugned, the petitioner has filed the instant revision petition. ( 2 ) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully gone through the judgment and order impugned. Non-petitioners No. 2 and 3 filed an application seeking maintenance against the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner married to non-petitioner No. 2 seven years ago according to Hindu Rites and from the loin of the petitioner, nonpetitioner no. 2 Raju was born. It is alleged that the petitioner started harassing the non-petitioner No. 2 on account of demand of dowry. She was turned out of her matrimonial home by pushing her and was asked to bring a sum of Rs. 50,000/- from her father so that the petitioner could purchase a new tractor. It is also alleged that since then, she has been residing at her parents house. She claimed maintenance of Rs. 2000/- per month for herself, Rs. 1000/- per month for minor son Raju and rs. 500/- for medical expenses as she was pregnant. It is alleged that the petitioner earns Rs. 10,000/- per month by undertaking the work of Sweet maker at Mumbai and apart from this, the petitioner has 10 bighas of land by which he earns Rs. 5000/- per month; he lands the money on interest and as such he earns Rs. 20,000/- per month. ( 3 ) THE trial court relying on the evidence produced by the non-petitioners, came to the conclusion that the petitioner failed to maintain the non-petitioners No. 2 and 3 and nonpetitioner wife was harassed on account of demand of dowry and turned out of her matrimonial home. The non-petitioner wife appeared as AW-1 and produced AW-2 Dhanna and AW-3 bhuralal. The petitioner himself appeared as NAW-1 and produced NAW-2 Ganeshlal and NAW-3 Lachhiram. The non-petitioner wife appeared as AW-1 and produced AW-2 Dhanna and AW-3 bhuralal. The petitioner himself appeared as NAW-1 and produced NAW-2 Ganeshlal and NAW-3 Lachhiram. ( 4 ) BY the judgment and order impugned, the trial court awarded maintenance @ Rs. 500/- per month in favour of nonpetitioner no. 2 wife, @ Rs. 300/- per month in favour of nonpetitioner no. 3 Raju and Rs. 200/- per month in favour of minor daughter Anita, in all Rs. 1000/- per month. A sum of Rs. 1000/-per month as maintenance in favour of three persons cannot be said to be in any way excessive. In the circumstances therefore, I do not find any error, illegality or perversity in the order impugned. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed.