PRAYAGRAJ, March 26 -- The Allahabad high court has held that committing a person to a civil prison for default in paying maintenance to his wife or children does not absolve him of his legal liability to pay further monthly arrears. A bench of justice Praveen Kumar Giri said that the doctrine of double jeopardy under Section 300 of the CrPC is entirely inapplicable to the execution of maintenance orders under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The bench added that maintenance proceedings result in neither a conviction nor an acquittal, and hence, the court refusing to execute an award of maintenance amount by invoking a plea under section 300 CrPC would be contrary to the law. The court passed this order on Tuesday (March 25) while hearing a petition filed by Hasina Khatoon, challenging a January 2023 order of a civil judge (junior division)/fast track court (crime against women) in Moradabad. In July 2019, a magistrate had directed the petitioner's husband to pay interim maintenance of Rs.4,000 each to the wife and their disabled son. However, he failed to pay arrears amounting to Rs.2.64 lakh, prompting the wife to move an execution application. A recovery warrant was issued, and her husband was arrested on October 30, 2022. After he refused to deposit the amount, a judicial magistrate sent him to civil prison for 30 days. Even after his release, he did not clear the dues. The wife then sought a fresh recovery warrant, but her plea was rejected on the ground that the husband had already undergone 30 days' detention for the same arrears, with the civil judge relying upon Section 300 of the CrPC. The husband defended the order impugned by contending that since he had served 30-day imprisonment as a penalty, he did not owe his wife any arrears. He also challenged the maintainability of the instant application under Section 482 of the CrPC on the ground that the impugned order would be appealable under Section 29 of the domestic violence (DV) Act. In its March 24 order, the high court set aside the trial court's decision and directed it to pass a fresh order for recovery of arrears, along with 6% simple interest. It also said that if the amount is not paid, the trial court may attach the husband's property....