Crl. Misc. No.M-13925 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-13925 of 2010 Date of Decision: October 8, 2010 Rohtash …..Petitioner Vs. Darshana …..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr. Rajbir Sehrawat, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Petitioner is liable to pay the arrears of maintenance awarded under Section 125 Cr.P.C. to his wife Darshana. He had filed objections in the execution petition stating that she has remarried. His objections were dismissed uptil High Court. In the second round of execution proceedings for recovery of arrears of maintenance, the petitioner has again taken up the Crl. Misc. No.M-13925 of 2010 [2] said plea but petitioner claims that his objections have again been dismissed. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that when earlier objections were dismissed, he did not possession the marriage agreement Ex.P2. Petitioner claims that in view of the changed circumstances, the respondent wife is not entitled to any maintenance. It appears that the petitioner has not filed any application for alteration of allowances under Section 125 Cr.P.C. by relying upon marriage agreement of his wife with another person. This petition against the execution of the award of maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. does not warrant interference and is dismissed. However, it is observed that the petitioner will be at liberty to file a fresh application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. with proof of change in the circumstances of the respondent who had been receiving the maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. It will be open to the petitioner to establish the marriage of respondent and claim relief. No ground is made out for interference in the execution application filed by the respondent under Section 125 Cr.P.C. It is made clear that in case the petitioner is able to establish the changed circumstances by producing relevant and material evidence it will be open to him to get his application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. decided in his favour. This order will not, in any manner, prejudice the rights of the respondent to recover the entire arrears of maintenance existing till date. October 8, 2010 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE Crl. Misc. No.M-13925 of 2010 [3]