Accused Seven And Eight Lived In Another State. The Case Against Them Is Over.
A dowry prosecution reached out to relatives hundreds of kilometres away. The Andhra Pradesh High Court found nothing in the material to hold them.
The Court held that a prima facie case is not made out against the petitioners and there is absolutely no positive material against them. Even leaving their own documents out of account, the remaining material does not constitute an offence, and continuing the proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law leading to injustice. The proceedings against them under Sections 498-A, 313, 342 and 506 and the Dowry Prohibition Act were quashed.
- The test was applied without their documents — even then, what was left disclosed no offence.
- Mala fide and vengeance are recognised grounds where a proceeding is instituted to settle a private grudge.
- Only two of the accused were before the Court; the case against the rest is untouched.
- They live in another State, which is how such names commonly come to be added.
- Court
- High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati
- Bench
- Justice SUNITHA GANDHAM
- Citation
- Criminal Petition No. 6761 of 2025
- Case
- Criminal Petition No. 6761 of 2025
- Decided
- 2 September 2026
- Outcome
- Criminal petition allowed; proceedings against the petitioners quashed
The ground the Court applied
Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide, or is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and to spite him owing to a private and personal grudge, the inherent jurisdiction is available.
What the record disclosed
The record revealed that a prima facie case is not made out against the petitioners, and that there is absolutely no positive material to attract the case against them.
Even assuming for the sake of argument that the documents relied on by the petitioners could not be considered in a petition of this kind, the remaining material does not constitute an offence.
Continuation of the proceedings against them is therefore nothing but an abuse of the process of law leading to injustice.
The order
The criminal petition was allowed, and the proceedings against the petitioners — the seventh and eighth accused — for offences under Sections 498-A, 313, 342 and 506 of the Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending before the First Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, were quashed.
Who argued it
Appearances as recorded in the judgment of the Court.
Frequently asked
Can relatives named in a dowry case get the proceedings quashed?
Where no prima facie case and no positive material exists against them, yes. That is what happened here.
Does this end the whole case?
No. The quashing was confined to the seventh and eighth accused.
Getting a relative's name out of a matrimonial case
- Show what the complaint says about your client specifically, which is usually nothing beyond the relationship.
- Argue the case on the prosecution material alone, so the answer does not depend on your own documents.
- Establish distance and absence — residence in another State carries weight on over-implication.
- Ask for quashing confined to your client; the case against others continues.
Source. High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Criminal Petition No. 6761 of 2025, decided 2 September 2026 by Justice SUNITHA GANDHAM. This explainer is written from the judgment text as reported.
Claw tracks High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati and 24 other High Courts, reads every order handed back, and surfaces the directions that carry a deadline. clawlaw.in