Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:133385 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 28614 of 2025 Applicant :- Bal Chand Ram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. Heard Sri Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Ladli Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State. The present application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S has been filed to quash the order dated 15.04.2025 passed by Principal Judge Family Court, Azamgarh in Execution (Maintenance) Case No. 319 of 2024 (Lalti Vs. Balchand) arising out of an application under Section 147 of B.N.S.S. (128 of Cr.P.C.), whereby the recovery warrant/non-bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant and directing the S.H.O. concerned to arrest the applicant for recovery of arrears of maintenance amount as well as quashing the entire proceedings of case aforesaid. Learned counsel for the applicant does not want the relief of quashing of entire execution (maintenance) case. The aforesaid relief of quashing entire execution case is dismissed as not pressed. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the impugned order 15.04.2025 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 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 as well as non-bailable warrant against the applicant or attachment 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 as well as non-bailable warrants 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 partly allowed and the order dated 15.04.2025 is 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). The other relief for direction to decide the case expeditiously is not pressed by learned counsel for the applicant. Order Date :- 6.8.2025 Kpy Digitally signed by :- KAVLESHWAR PRASAD YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad