SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Raj) 20

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
BHUWAN GOYAL
Daljeet Singh Saluja, S/o. Mahendra Singh Saluja – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Deepak Goyal, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Vivek Choudhary, Dy.G.A.

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The court held that non-bailable warrants cannot be issued without first attempting to recover dues via recovery warrants under CrPC and without following the levy procedures. (!) - Section 125(3) CrPC provides that warrants for levying the amount due can be issued after failure to comply, with a provision restricting issuance of such warrants within one year of the due date. (!) - Section 421 CrPC outlines the procedure to levy fines, including attachment and sale of movable property or recovery as arrears of land revenue. (!) (!) (!) - The magistrate should levy the amount first and only if recovery is unsuccessful or partial, proceed to sentencing and then consider warrants for arrest to bring the defaulter to court. (!) (!) (!) - The case references Vimla (supra), Sachin (supra), Vipin Kumar (supra), and Deepak Singh Rajawat (supra) support the procedural sequence for enforcement of maintenance. (!) (!) (!) (!) - The arrest warrant quashed because no recovery report or levy procedure was shown on record prior to issuing the arrest warrant. (!) - The order quashed certain lower-court arrest warrants and affirmed rest of the orders. (!)

How to ensure non-bailable warrants for maintenance enforcement are issued only after attempting recovery throughWarrant/levy procedures under CrPC?

What is the proper procedure for levy of maintenance under Section 125(3) CrPC before issuing arrest warrants?

What are the required steps and order of actions for recovery of maintenance and when can arrest warrants be issued as per Section 125(3) and 421 CrPC?


Table of Content
1. application for early hearing allowed. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. multiple petitions related to a matrimony dispute. (Para 4)
3. arguments against issuance of arrest warrants. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. court analysis of procedural requirements under section 125 crpc. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
5. clarification of the procedure for levying fines. (Para 13 , 14)
6. quashing of lower court's arrest warrants. (Para 15)
7. order to file copies in each connected file. (Para 16)

ORDER :

BHUWAN GOYAL, J.

S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 8064/2024 :

1. Matter comes up on an application for early hearing of the case.

2. The application is allowed for the reasons mentioned therein and with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, this criminal misc. petition is being decided finally today at this stage.

S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition Nos. 8039/2024; 8037/2024; 8040/2024; 8059/2024 and 8064/2024

3. Since these criminal misc. petitions arise out of a matrimony dispute having arisen between the same parties, they are being decided by this common order.

4. These criminal misc. petitions have been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 6.11.2024 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Women At

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top