HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7230 of 2025 Court No. - 74 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J. Sri Sharad Kumar Singh, Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of private opposite party no. 2, which is taken on record. Office is also directed to detach the record of Criminal Revision No. 5797 of 2024 - Devpratap @ Raju Vs. State of U.P & Another. Heard Sri Ghan Shyam Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sharad Kumar Singh, learned counsel for private - opposite party no. 2 and Sri Chhavi Pal Singh, learned A.G.A for the State. The present application under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has been filed to quash the order dated 08.01.2025 passed by Principal Judge Family Court, Mainpuri, in Execution Case No. 923 of 2024 (Smt. Shivani Versus Devpratap @ Raju), arising out of an application under Section 147 of B.N.S.S. (Section 128 of Cr.P.C.), whereby recovery warrant as well as non-bailable warrant have been issue against the applicant to recover of the arrears of maintenance. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the impugned orders 08.1.2025 has been passed without considering the facts and circumstances and position of law as law laid down by the Supreme Court in Rajnesh Vs. Neha & Anr. (2021) 2 SCC 324, wherein it has been directed that the enforcement/execution of orders of maintenance, may be enforced under Section 28A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956; Section 20(6) of the D.V. Act; and Section 128 of Cr.P.C., as may be applicable. The order of maintenance may be enforced as a money decree of a civil court as per the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ghan Shyam Yadav, Nikhil Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Devpratap Alias Raju .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) provisions of the C.P.C., more particularly Sections 51, 55, 58, 60 read with Order XXI of C.P.C. It is further submitted that the impugned orders have been passed to enforce the recovery of arrears of maintenance by issuing recovery warrant and non- bailable warrant against the applicant without following the procedure as provided in the Civil Procedure Code for executing the money decree. The matter is related to settled position of law. There is no other point for consideration except issuing recovery warrant as well as non-bailable warrants against the applicant to recover the arrears of maintenance, due to this reason, the opportunity to call the counter affidavit from the opposite party no. 2 is dispensed with. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the application is allowed and the order dated 08.01.2025, is hereby quashed. It is made clear that the court concerned shall proceed to enforce or recover the arrears of maintenance amount as money decree of a civil court as per provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, as per law laid down by the Supreme Court in Rajnesh (Supra). September 11, 2025 Vinod. NA528 No. 7230 of 2025 2 (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.) Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad