JUDGMENT Mr. L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) : - Crl. Misc. No. 7342 of 2013 : Allowed as prayed for. Main Case : Gaurav has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short – Cr. P. C.), assailing judgment dated 08.05.2012 (Annexure P-1), passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Narwana and judgment dated 05.12.2012, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jind (Annexure P-2). 2. Respondent Ashu is wife of petitioner Gaurav. 3. Respondent filed petition under Section 125 Cr. P. C. seeking maintenance from the petitioner alleging that she has no source of income, whereas the petitioner-husband has income of more than Rs.30,000/- per month from business being run with his father. 4. The petitioner-husband claimed that respondent-wife has income by taking tutions, whereas the husband himself was working as labourer. 5. Learned Magistrate, vide impugned judgment Annexure P-1, directed the husband to pay Rs.4,000/- per month as maintenance to the wife. Revision petition preferred by the husband against the said judgment has been dismissed by learned Sessions Judge, vide judgment Annexure P-2, along with revision petition filed by the wife for enhancement of the maintenance allowance. Feeling aggrieved, husband has filed this revision petition. 6. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file. 7. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the amount of Rs.4,000/- per month as maintenance is excessive. The contention cannot be accepted. The petitioner has been proved to be partner in the business with his father. However, anticipating that the wife would file petition to claim maintenance, the petitioner, in advance, retired from the said partnership by way of dissolution deed. It shows mala fide conduct of the petitioner to hide his real income. The matter does not end here. The petitioner, in his reply, claimed to be a labourer, but did not allege as to how much he was earning. On the other hand, the petitioner, who was running business with his father, cannot be said to have become labourer overnight. 8. In the aforesaid circumstances, maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month, granted by the courts below, cannot be said to be excessive. It is all the more so, keeping in view the sky-rocketing prices of daily necessities these days. 9. It may also be added that instant petition in the garb of petition under Section 482 Cr. 8. In the aforesaid circumstances, maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month, granted by the courts below, cannot be said to be excessive. It is all the more so, keeping in view the sky-rocketing prices of daily necessities these days. 9. It may also be added that instant petition in the garb of petition under Section 482 Cr. P. C., is nothing but a second revision petition, which is, however, barred by Section 397 (3) Cr. P. C. 10. Resultantly, finding no merit in the instant revision petition, the same is dismissed in limine. ---------0.B.S.0------------