The Allahabad High Court has strongly criticized the practice of issuing arrest warrants against individuals who fail to pay maintenance arrears to their spouses, labeling it as "inhumane" and a violation of personal dignity. In a significant ruling, the court set aside an order from the Aligarh Family Court that had issued a recovery and arrest warrant against a man for non-payment of maintenance to his wife.
Court's Emphasis on Dignity and Liberty
Justice Rajiv Lochan Shukla, presiding over the bench, made poignant observations in the order, stressing that a person liable to pay maintenance should not be treated as a criminal. The court stated, "A person who is liable to pay maintenance is not to be treated as a person who has committed a crime. His personal dignity and liberty cannot be trampled with by the courts in their excessive enthusiasm in enforcement of orders of maintenance, even if there is deliberate non-payment."
Further elaborating, the bench added, "The courts must keep in mind that every individual must be treated with dignity that befits his status as a free citizen of the country. The routine issuance of arrest warrants is not only illegal but also inhumane, as it tramples upon the dignity of an individual subjected to arrest and production before the court as if accused of a crime."
Background of the Case
The plea was filed by Mohammad Shahzad, seeking to quash a September 25 order by the Additional Principal Judge of the Family Court in Aligarh. This order had issued recovery and arrest warrants against Shahzad to recover arrears of maintenance owed to his wife.
According to the Additional Government Advocate (AGA), the High Court had previously granted protection to Shahzad in an April 25, 2024 order, subject to conditions. These conditions included monthly payments of Rs 10,000 and Rs 5,000 to the opposite parties, along with directives to pay 50% of the arrears within a month and the remaining in three equal monthly installments starting June 25, 2024.
The AGA noted that in case of default, the Principal Judge was authorized to recover the arrears with 10% interest. While acknowledging that Shahzad had violated the High Court's directions, the AGA also conceded that there was no provision in the order for arrest to recover maintenance arrears, and such warrants cannot be issued for this purpose.
Judicial Rebuke and Legal Precedents
Justice Shukla's bench highlighted a concerning trend in Family Courts, stating, "This Court has observed in a number of cases that orders are being passed by Family Courts issuing warrants of arrest, along with recovery warrants, and in some cases non-bailable warrants. This is clearly against specific statutory provisions and directions given by the Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh (supra). This practice must stop."
The court emphasized that recovery of maintenance arrears should be made strictly in accordance with statutory provisions, not through arrest warrants. It remarked, "The act of issuance of arrest warrants is not merely a misinterpretation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court and statutory law itself, but is an act of overstepping jurisdiction by the Family Court, which is absolutely illegal."
Remand and Future Directions
In its final order, the Allahabad High Court remitted the matter back to the Additional Principal Judge of the Family Court in Aligarh. The bench directed that the application for enforcement of the maintenance order be decided strictly in line with statutory provisions and Supreme Court directives, reaffirming that no arrest warrant can be issued for recovery of maintenance arrears.
This ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to balancing enforcement of maintenance orders with the protection of individual rights, setting a precedent against the use of arrest as a tool for recovery in such cases.
