$~164

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 372/2026

MR GAURAV SHARMA .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Anirudh Bakhru, Mr. Arpit

Rai, Advocates.

versus

SHRUTI GUPTA & ANR. .....Respondents

Through:

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

O R D E R

% 15.01.2026

CRL.M.A.1412/2026 (for exemption

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 372/2026 & CRL.M.A. 1411/2026 (for stay

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 26.11.2025, passed by the learned Family Court-01, South, Saket Courts, New Delhi, whereby warrants of arrest have been issued against him in connection with execution proceedings [Execution Petition No. 11 Ex. Crl/93/2024] arising out of an order of maintenance dated 15.04.2024, passed by the

Family Court in Maintenance Petition No. 224/2023.

2. Mr. Anirudh Bakhru, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the judgment dated 15.04.2024, by which the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 30,000/- per month to the respondent was passed ex- parte, and the petitioner has thereafter filed an application under Section

126(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 [“CrPC”] for setting aside of the said ex-parte judgment. That application remains pending before the Family Court. In the course of the proceedings, the Family Court vide order dated 06.11.2024, held that the petitioner should deposit at least 50% of the arrears of maintenance as a pre-condition for consideration of his application under Section 126(2) of the CrPC.

3. The petitioner approached this Court by way of CRL.M.C. 990/2025, challenging the aforesaid order dated 06.11.2024. By order dated 13.02.2025, this Court, issued notice, and stayed the operation of the said order to the extent that required deposit as a pre-condition for hearing. The said petition is still pending.

4. Mr. Bakhru submits that the Family Court has thereafter adjourned the execution proceedings on several occasions, inter-alia, in view of the pendency of CRL.M.C. 990/2025 before this Court. However, by the impugned order, warrants of arrest have been issued in the execution proceedings.

5. It appears from the aforesaid that, although the direction for deposit as a condition for hearing of the application under Section 126(2) of the CrPC has been stayed by this Court, both the application under Section 126(2) of CrPC and the proceedings for execution remain pending. Mr. Bakhru submits that the petitioner would be agreeable to deposit some proportion of the maintenance amount, as may be directed by this Court, in the execution proceedings, and that directions may be given for expeditious consideration of the application under Section 126(2) of the CrPC.

6. Issue notice to the respondent. The respondent may be served additionally through learned counsel appearing on her behalf before the Family Court and/or before this Court in CRL.M.C. 990/2025.

7. List on 19.01.2026, in the category of “For Admission” matters, to enable to learned counsel for respondent to enter appearance.

8. Keeping in mind that the execution proceedings were earlier adjourned without opposition by learned counsel for the respondent, as evident from the orders of the Family Court dated 20.05.2025 and 22.09.2025, the warrants of arrest will not be executed against the petitioner until the next date of hearing.

9. Copies of the said Family Court orders, handed over by Mr.

Bakhru, are taken on record.

PRATEEK JALAN, J JANUARY 15, 2026 ‘Bhupi’/AD/