Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:141693 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14909 of 2025 Applicant :- Satya Narayan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Dinesh Kumar Yadav,G.A.,Navneet Kumar Singh,Vinod Kumar Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. Sri Dinesh Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vinod Kumar, learned counsel for private opposite party no.2 and Ms. Ladli Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State are present. The present application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S has been filed to quash the orders dated 11.03.2025 and 26.03.2025 passed by Principal Judge Family Court, Azamgarh in Execution (Maintenance) Case No. 7 of 2022 arising out of an application under Section 128 of Cr.P.C. whereby the recovery warrant/arrest warrant has been issued to recover the arrears of maintenance amount against the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the impugned orders 11.03.2025 and 26.03.2025 have 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 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/arrest warrant against the applicant without following the procedure as provided in the Civil Procedure Code. The matter is related to settled position of law. There is no other point for consideration except issuing recovery warrant/arrest warrant 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 orders dated 11.03.2025 and 26.03.2025 are hereby quashed. It is made clear that the court concerned may 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 law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh (supra). Order Date :- 19.8.2025 Kpy Digitally signed by :- KAVLESHWAR PRASAD YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad