IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRL.P.NO.3353 OF 2010. Date:19.04.2010 Between:- Syed Fazal ..Petitioner And Syed Nazia Parveen and another .. Respondents ORDER:- This petition is filed by the husband questioning proceedings in E.P.No.4 of 2010 in F.C.O.P.No.112 of 2008 on the file of the Family Judge, Nellore. 2. After obtaining order under Section 125 Cr.P.C. on 09.01.2009 against the petitioner/husband, the first respondent/wife filed execution proceedings under Section 128 Cr.P.C. for recovery of amount of Rs.62,000/- being arrears of maintenance upto date from the date of filing of F.C.O.P.No.112 of 2008. E.P. was filed in the lower Court on 30.01.2010. It is stated that the lower Court issued warrant against the petitioner for recovery of the E.P. amount which represents maintenance amount from 28.05.2007, which is date of filing of maintenance case in the lower Court. Relying upon TAKKALAPALLY LAXMAMMA VS. TAKKALAPALLY RANGAIAH AND ANOTHER[1], it is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that execution proceedings will lie only in respect of arrears of maintenance for a period of one year as per Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. 3. As on today, the petitioner did not pay arrears of maintenance even in respect of period of one year prior to filing of E.P. in the lower Court. Without making payment of the admitted liability for twelve months prior to filing of E.P., it does not lie in the mouth of the petitioner to contend that warrant issued by the lower Court is contrary to Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. It is open to the petitioner to file a petition in the lower Court to recall the warrant given against him after the petitioner depositing arrears for twelve months prior to filing of the E.P. In such a case, the lower Court will consider contention of the petitioner on merits and pass necessary orders with regard to arrears of maintenance prior to one year period. 4. Subject to the above observations, the petition is dismissed. _​_________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J 19th April 2010 AMD [1] 1992 Criminal Law Journal 266