Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:131780 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 19609 of 2025 Applicant :- Sunil Panwar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Naushad Siddiqui,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Amit Krishna,G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. Heard Shri Bipin Kumar, Advocate holding brief of Shri Mohd. Naushad Siddiqui, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri P.K. Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State. The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed to quash the order dated 13.5.2025 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffar Nagar in Execution (Maintenance) Case No. 932 of 2024 (Smt. Chinu @ Komal Vs. Sunil Panwar), arising out of an application under Section 128 of Cr.P.C., whereby the Family Court issued Recovery Warrant against the applicant to recover the arrears of maintenance. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order 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 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 order has been passed to enforce the recovery of arrears of maintenance by issuing recovery 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 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 13.05.2025 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 law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh (supra). Order Date :- 4.8.2025 Kpy Digitally signed by :- KAVLESHWAR PRASAD YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad