CRM No. M-45647 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-45647 of 2007 Date of decision:- 12.11.2010 Shanti Devi wife of Sh. Gian Chand son of Rati Ram son of Jai Ram daughter of Surja Ram, r/o village Hariahera (Raisika), Tehsil Sohna, District Gurgaon. ......Petitioner Vs Gian Chand son of Rati Ram, r/o Badoli, Tehsil Palwal, District Faridabad, employed as Drafsman DDA Sarita Vihar, New Delhi. ......Respondent CORAM:-HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI Present: Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate, for Mr. Pankaj Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Vipul Dharmani, Advocate, for the respondent. * * * * RANJAN GOGOI, J (ORAL) This is a second revision by the petitioner-wife, though purported to be filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The petitioner seeks enhancement of the maintenance granted to her by the learned first Revisional Court. In fact the learned Court below had enhanced the maintenance amount from Rs. 800/- as awarded by the learned trial Court to Rs. 1350/- per month. A second revision by the same party is barred under the provisions of Section 397(3) Cr.P.C. Such bar cannot be overcome merely by labelling the petition to be one under Section 482 Cr.P.C. CRM No. M-45647 of 2007 2 In fact exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against a revisional order would require failure of justice to have been occasioned by the order of the first Revisional Court. This is the law laid down by the Apex Court in Krishnan Vs. Krishnaveni and another, 1997(1), RCR, 724. Failure of justice has to be distinguished from a mere prejudice that may be caused to an aggrieved party. Considering the above, the Court is not inclined to entertain this petition any further. Learned Counsel for the petitioner-wife has submitted that the income of the respondent-husband has increased on account of Pay Revision which fact should be taken note of by this Court. Notwithstanding the argument made, the details of the present pay of the respondent-husband and the persons dependent on him have not been brought on record. The said aspect of the matter, therefore, cannot be gone into. However, it will be open for the petitioner to invoke the provisions of Section 127 Cr.P.C. by filing an appropriate application before the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Gurgaon, if she is so advised. Consequently, the present Criminal Miscellaneous case is disposed of in the above terms. (RANJAN GOGOI) 12.11.2010 JUDGE Amodh