The Andhra Pradesh High Court has quashed a dowry harassment case against a husband and four of his family members. It noted that the wife's complaint made no mention of an earlier incident in which her own relatives were later convicted of attacking the husband's family. Justice Tuhin Kumar Gedela passed the order on 11 August 2026.
Background
The case came up from C.C. No. 211 of 2018 before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nandikotkur, in Nandyal District. It arose from a complaint of 6 June 2018 and covers Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (cruelty by a husband or his relatives), read with Section 34, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
The couple married on 26 November 2015. The wife alleged that her husband and in-laws demanded an additional Rs 10 lakh and harassed her physically and mentally. She also alleged she was beaten on 25 April 2018 and treated at a government hospital in Kurnool the next day. The petitioners are the husband, his parents, his brother and his sister.
The petitioners' counsel argued that the complaint was a counterblast. According to him, on 25 April 2018 the wife's family had attacked the husband and his relatives. On the husband's complaint, the Magistrate in C.C. No. 207 of 2018 convicted all nine accused under Sections 323 and 506 IPC on 12 March 2022. Each was fined Rs 1,000. He added that the wife's complaint and her police statement were silent on this episode, and that the allegations against his clients were general and omnibus.
The Assistant Public Prosecutor responded that the two incidents were separate. He said the allegations disclosed an offence and should be tested at trial.
The Court agreed that the complaint did not mention the 25 April 2018 incident, which ended in a conviction by a competent court. It also examined the chargesheet and said:
"Leaving apart the said arguments, this Court has also ventured into the contents in the chargesheet which is filed after investigation in pursuance of the complaint dated 06.06.2018 and does not indicate any specific overt act/ allegations so as to attract the offences under Section 498A IPC."
The Court relied on Supreme Court rulings including Preeti Gupta, Geeta Mehrotra, Kahkashan Kausar, Dara Lakshmi and Geddam Jhansi, which caution against roping in relatives through vague allegations. It added that the claims against the husband could not be taken lightly. However, given the order in C.C. No. 207 of 2018, it found this a fit case for using its inherent powers. The Court also noted that the trial had not begun because of an interim order.
The High Court allowed the petition and quashed C.C. No. 211 of 2018 against all the accused, with no order as to costs.
Case Details
Case Title: X v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Another
Case Number: Criminal Petition No. 7328 of 2022
Judge: Justice Tuhin Kumar Gedela
Decision Date: August 11, 2026
