HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34965 of 2025 Court No. - 74 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J. Vakalatnama filed today by Sri Pranshu Gupta, Advocate on behalf of private opposite party nos. 2, 3 and 4 is taken on record Sri D.K. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pranshu Gupta, learned counsel for the private opposite party no. 2 and Sri A.K. Rai, learned A.G.A. for the State are present. The present application u/s 528 of BNSS of 2023 has been filed with prayer to quash the orders dated 17.02.2025, 07.05.2025, 23.06.2025, 12.08.2025 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No. 1, Meerrut in Execution (Maintenance) Case No. 662 of 2018, arising out of an application under Section 125 (3) of Cr.P.C., whereby recovery warrant as well as Non- Bailable Warrant has been issued 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 of the case and the 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 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 and Non- Bailable 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 as well as Non-Bailable Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dharmendra Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Amit Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Warrant to recover the arrears of maintenance, due to this reason, the opportunity to call the counter affidavit from the opposite party nos. 2, 3 and 4 is dispensed with. In view of above facts and circumstances, the application is allowed and the order dated 17.02.2025, 07.05.2025, 23.06.2025, 12.08.2025 are 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). September 12, 2025 MAA/- NA528 No. 34965 of 2025 2 (Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad