HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 36433 of 2025 Court No. - 74 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J. During the course of hearing learned counsel for the applicant has corrected the prayer clause of this application. Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Karunakar Singh, 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 18.01.2025 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Nagar in Execution Case No. 1429 of 2019, whereby recovery warrant has been issued against the applicant to recover the arrears of maintenance as well as order dated 01.08.2025, whereby an application under Section 126 (2) of Cr.P.C. has been dismissed for want of prosecution. Learned counsel for the applicant does not want to press the relief of quashing of the order dated 01.08.2025. Accordingly, this relief is dismissed as not pressed with liberty to file an appropriate application/proceedings before the court of competent jurisdiction. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order dated 18.01.2025 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Raj Kamal Katheria .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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 above facts and circumstances, the application is partly allowed and the order dated 18.01.2025 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 22, 2025 MAA/- NA528 No. 36433 of 2025 2 (Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad