HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 33961 of 2025 Court No. - 74 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J. Sri Sushil Kuamr Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashwani Kumar Rai, learned A.G.A. for the State are present. The present application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Execution (Maintenace) Case No. 269 of 2023 arising out of an application under Section 125(3) of Cr.P.C. as well as order dated 3.4.2024 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Etawah, whereby recovery warrant and non bailable warrant have been issued against the applicant for recovery of arrears of maintenance. Learned counsel for the applicant does not want to press the quashing of entire proceedings of aforesaid case. In view of above, the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings of aforesaid case is dismissed as not pressed. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order dated 3.4.2024 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sushil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Jitendra Singh Tomar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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 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 3.4.2024, 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 8, 2025 A.P. Pandey NA528 No. 33961 of 2025 2 (Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND PRAKASH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad