Srinagar, August 13: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has set aside a show-cause notice issued by a Judicial Magistrate First Class in Shopian to the District Collector over the recovery of maintenance dues, holding that the Magistrate had exceeded the jurisdiction available under law.

Justice Rahul Bharti passed the order on August 7 while hearing a petition filed by Shishir Gupta, IAS, presently serving as District Collector Shopian, against Ufaira Gulzar and others.

The matter originated from maintenance proceedings initiated by the wife and daughter of respondent No. 3 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The proceedings, filed on April 20, 2023, were disposed of by the Judicial Magistrate on December 4, 2025, with directions to pay monthly maintenance of ₹18,000, including ₹10,000 for the wife and ₹8,000 for the daughter. The maintenance was made applicable from the date the proceedings were instituted.

After the respondent allegedly failed to pay both the monthly maintenance and accumulated arrears, the wife and daughter filed an execution application on December 9, 2025.

The High Court observed that the execution proceedings remained pending as notices issued to the respondent were repeatedly returned unserved. It noted that the Magistrate had not used the available legal provisions for securing the respondent’s appearance through bailable or non-bailable warrants.

Instead, on February 20, 2026, the Magistrate issued a levy warrant to the District Collector, Shopian, for recovery of the outstanding maintenance.

The High Court explained that under the applicable provisions of the CrPC, maintenance awarded by a court can be recovered through a warrant for levy of the amount as a fine. Once such a warrant is issued to the Collector, recovery can be pursued against the movable or immovable assets of the person in default.

The Magistrate later directed the District Collector to provide details of the movable and immovable properties belonging to the maintenance defaulter.

The Assistant Commissioner Revenue, Shopian, subsequently submitted a report on June 4, 2026, identifying immovable property belonging to respondent No. 3.

The Magistrate, however, took exception to the report on the ground that it identified immovable property but did not provide details of movable assets. A show-cause notice was consequently issued to the District Collector on July 10, 2026, prompting the Collector to approach the High Court.

The High Court found the subsequent course of action legally unsustainable.

Justice Rahul Bharti noted that after issuing the levy warrant to the Collector on February 20, 2026, the Magistrate issued another levy warrant on July 4, 2026, directing service upon the defaulter through the SHO of Police Station Shopian.

The Court held that the law did not provide for issuance of such a second levy warrant in the circumstances and observed that the subsequent action had effectively undermined the earlier levy warrant issued to the Collector.

The High Court therefore held that the Judicial Magistrate had exceeded the jurisdiction available under the Code of Criminal Procedure and declared the July 10 show-cause notice illegal, setting it aside.

However, the Court did not halt the maintenance recovery proceedings. Instead, it directed the Magistrate to issue a fresh levy warrant addressed to the District Collector, Shopian.

The Court further directed that the recovery be carried out through the procedure prescribed for recovery of arrears of land revenue under Section 91 of the Jammu and Kashmir Land Revenue Act, Samvat 1996.

Authorities were directed to proceed with attachment and sale of the identified property belonging to the maintenance defaulter, with the recovered amount to be placed before the Judicial Magistrate for payment to the wife and daughter.

The order effectively restores the recovery proceedings to the statutory mechanism while ensuring that the maintenance awarded to the two beneficiaries is pursued through the legally prescribed process.