HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35153 of 2025 Court No. - 74 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J. Sri V. P. Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Nandini Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Alok Mishra, 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 order dated 21.08.2025, whereby recovery warrant as well as arrest warrant have been issued against the applicant to recover the arrears of maintenance as well as ex-parte judgment and order dated 06.04.2023 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bareilly in Execution (Maintenance) Case No. 1039 of 2024 (Smt. Rukhseen vs. Salman Khan), arising out of an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., by which maintenance application has been allowed. After some argument learned counsel for the applicant does not want to press the relief to quash the judgment and order dated 06.04.2023. The relief to quash the order dated 06.04.2023 is dismissed as not pressed. 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. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nandini Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Salman Khan .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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 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 as well as 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 above facts and circumstances, the application is partly allowed and the order dated 21.08.2025 is 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 15, 2025 MAA/- NA528 No. 35153 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