S.B.CRIM.MISC. PETITION NO.19/2006 Rugh Lal Vs. Smt.Sita Devi & Anr. Date :: 03.07.2006 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR None appears for the petitioner. Despite repeated calls no one appears for the petitioner. The petitioner has already availed one revision before Additional Sessions Judge, Churu in Criminal Revision Petition No.44/2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Churu. The trial court granted maintenance in favour of respondents No.1 and 2. That order came to be challenged by way of revision by the petitioner. Both the courts below concurrently found that non-petitioners No.1 and 2 entitled for the interim maintenance. The petitioner has availed one revision. The second revision is barred by Sub-section 3 of Section 397 Cr.P.C. However, in the garb of petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. petitioner seeks second revision which is otherwise barred by law. It is not the case of petitioner that in the event of non-interference serious miscarriage of justice will be caused. In the circumstances, it cannot be said that the order impugned would result in manifest injustice or abuse of process of any court warranting interference under inherent jurisdiction. The criminal misc. petition is, therefore, dismissed. [H.R. PANWAR],J. Ashwini/-