Allahabad High Court
SAJID @ ASIFversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- DEEPAK VERMA
Holding
Recovery and arrest warrants issued to enforce maintenance arrears are invalid; enforcement must be carried out as a money decree under the CPC.
Summary
The applicant, Sajid (also known as Asif), challenged recovery and arrest warrants issued against him for arrears of interim maintenance granted to his wife under Section 125 CrPC. The wife had obtained interim maintenance on 22.01.2019 and later filed an application under Section 147 BNSS for enforcement, leading the trial court to issue the warrants. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Rajnesh v. Neha & Another (2021) SCC 324, the applicant argued that such warrants are not permissible for recovering maintenance arrears and that enforcement must follow civil procedure provisions. The High Court agreed, holding that the warrants were contrary to established law and quashed the order dated 17.03.2025. It directed that the arrears be recovered as a money decree under the Code of Civil Procedure, in line with the Supreme Court’s guidance.
Issues considered
- Whether recovery and arrest warrants can be issued under Section 147 BNSS for enforcement of maintenance arrears granted under Section 125 CrPC.
- Whether the procedure prescribed under the Code of Civil Procedure must be followed for enforcement of maintenance orders.
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 51, 55, 58, 60, Order XXI
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 125, 128, 147, 528
- Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — s. 28A
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — s. 20(6)
Subjects
- maintenance
- Section 125 CrPC
- Section 147 BNSS
- recovery warrant
- arrest warrant
- enforcement of maintenance
- Hindu Marriage Act
- Domestic Violence Act
- Civil Procedure Code
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37831 of 2026
Sajid @ Asif
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bipin Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 74
HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the
State.
2. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the
applicant with prayer to quash the Order Dated 17.03.2025 in Misc. Case
No. 234 of 2019, 579 of 2020, 697 of 2021 and 1121 of 2022 in Gulista
Vs Sajid (Correct name Asif) Under Section 128 Cr.P.C., Police Station-
Khatauli, District-Muzaffarnagar as well as Non Bailable Warrant passed
by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No.02, Muzaffarnagar.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that opposite party no.2 is
wife of applicant and on account of some matrimonial dispute, opposite
party no.2 initiated proceeding U/s 125 Cr.P.C. for interim maintenance
and the same was allowed vide order dated 22.01.2019 ex parte. For
recovery of interim maintenance, opposite party no.2 moved application
U/s 147 BNSS before trial court and trial court issued recovery warrant as
well as arrest warrant against the applicant, in pursuance of order passed
on 22.01.2019. Applicant's counsel placed reliance over the judgment
passed by Hon'ble The Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha &
Another (2021)2 SCC 324, recovery warrant and arrest warrant cannot
be initiated by the court for recovery of arrears and maintenance.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the order passed by the
learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffarnagar is
against the provision laid down by the Apex Court in Rajnesh vs. Neha
NA528 No. 37831 of 2026
2
& Another (2021)2 SCC 324, wherein it has been directed that the
enforcement/execution of order 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the application is partly
allowed and the orders dated 17.03.2025, are hereby quashed.
8. 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 per the law laid
down by the Supreme Court in Rajnesh (supra).
(Deepak Verma,J.)
September 9, 2026
Nisha
Digitally signed by :-
nisha kumari
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…