1 APHC010084662023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1359/2023 Between: Meka Dharmendra Chowdary ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. VENKATA DURGA RAO ANANTHA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.,’)/Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) seeking to quash the proceedings against the Petitioner/Accused No.4 in Crime No.405 of 2019 of Penamaluru Police Station, Vijayawada registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for 2 brevity ‘the I.P.C’) and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for brevity DP Act’) 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Petitioner/Accused No.4 was abroad at the time of registration of the above- mentioned crime. After conducting a thorough investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against the other accused, showing the Petitioner/Accused No.4 as absconding. However, the charge sheet neither establishes that the Petitioner/Accused No.4 was absconding nor mentions any specific overt acts or details against him. 4. Accused No.1 is the husband, Accused No.2 is the mother-in-law, and Accused No.3 is the father-in-law. After a full-fledged trial, the learned Magistrate acquitted Accused Nos.1 and 2, and dismissed the case as abated against Accused No.3, as he died in the course of trial. It appears that no appeal was preferred against the judgment passed by the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate. 5. It is pertinent to note that Respondent No.2 and Accused No.1, being husband and wife, jointly filed a petition under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking dissolution of their marriage solemnized on 18.08.2016 by mutual consent. The XIV Additional District Judge-cum- Additional Family Court Judge, Vijayawada, vide order dated 01.11.2023 in 3 F.C.O.P. No.395 of 2023, allowed the petition and dissolved the marriage between them. 6. The petitioner has been residing at Winton Rd N, Rochester, New York, United States of America. In view of the fact that the marriage between Respondent No.2 and the brother of the petitioner/Accused No.1 has been dissolved by a decree of mutual consent, and that the criminal case lodged by Respondent No.2 in C.C. No.1015 of 2021 ended in acquittal, as the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, nothing further survives in the proceedings in FIR No.405 of 2019 against the petitioner. Continuation of the proceedings would amount to sheer wastage of the valuable time of the investigating agency and the learned Trial Court. 7. For the foregoing reasons, the Criminal Petition is allowed, and the proceedings in FIR No.405 of 2019 of Penamaluru Police Station, Vijayawada, are hereby quashed. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 09.02.2026 KMS 4 234 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.1359 of 2023 Date: 09.02.2026 KMS