Raj Kamal Katheria Vs State of U.P. and Another — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2025)

Raj Kamal Katheria Vs State of U.P. and Another — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application partly allowed; order dated 18.01.2025 of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Nagar in Execution Case No. 1429 of 2019 (recovery warrant for maintenance arrears) quashed; court concerned left free to enforce/recover the maintenance arrears as a money decree of a civil court under the CPC per Rajnesh (supra); relief against order dated 01.08.2025 dismissed as not pressed with liberty to file appropriate proceedings before a competent court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the recovery warrant issued on 18.01.2025 to recover arrears of maintenance, without following the procedure provided in the Code of Civil Procedure, was sustainable, in light of the Supreme Court's direction in Rajnesh that maintenance orders be enforced as money decrees of a civil court under the CPC.

Court's answer

The application under Section 528 BNSS is partly allowed and the order dated 18.01.2025 issuing the recovery warrant for arrears of maintenance is quashed.

Ratio / Principle

The relief of quashing the order dated 01.08.2025 was not pressed and stands dismissed as not pressed, with liberty to file an appropriate application/proceedings before a court of competent jurisdiction.

Key takeaways

The court concerned may proceed to enforce or recover the arrears of maintenance amount as a money decree of a civil court as per the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, as law laid down by the Supreme Court in Rajnesh (supra).ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), deciding an application under Section 528 BNSS by Raj Kamal Katheria, partly allowed it and quashed the order dated 18.01.2025 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Nagar in Execution Case No. 1429 of 2019, whereby a recovery warrant had been issued against the applicant to recover arrears of maintenance, the warrant having been issued without following the procedure provided in the Code of Civil Procedure. Invoking the Supreme Court's decision in Rajnesh vs. Neha & Anr. (2021) 2 SCC 324, the Court clarified that the court concerned may enforce or recover the maintenance arrears as a money decree of a civil court under the CPC, particularly Sections 51, 55, 58, 60 read with Order XXI CPC. The relief seeking quashing of the order dated 01.08.2025, dismissing the applicant's application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. for want of prosecution, was dismissed as not pressed, with liberty to file appropriate proceedings before a court of competent jurisdiction.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 36433 of 2025

Raj Kamal Katheria

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Anil Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

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

NA528 No. 36433 of 2025

2

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/-

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad