Roshni Yasmeen Shaik @ Shaik Roshni Yasmeen, D/o. Shaik Nazeer Basha vs State by Station House Officer, Mahila Police Station, Machilipatnam, Rep. by Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(AP) 393

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J
Roshni Yasmeen Shaik @ Shaik Roshni Yasmeen, D/o. Shaik Nazeer Basha – Appellant
Versus
State by Station House Officer, Mahila Police Station, Machilipatnam, Rep. by Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: O M R Law Firm.
For the Respondent: Public Prosecutor (AP), S. Lakshminarayana Reddy.

Table of Content
1. petitioner argues no specific allegations (Para 3)
2. respondent claims specific allegations (Para 4)
3. point for determination (Para 5)
4. inherent powers of high court (Para 6)
5. allegations of dowry and harassment (Para 7)
6. social media posts by accused no.1 (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
7. specific allegations required (Para 13 , 14 , 15)
8. proceedings quashed (Para 16 , 17)

ORDER :

The instant petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, [for short ‘Cr.P.C’] has been filed by the Petitioner/Accused No.4 seeking quashment of the proceedings against her in C.C.No.898 of 2022 on the file of the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class Trying Prohibition and Excise Act Cases, Machilipatnam for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, [for short ‘IPC’] and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, [for short ‘D.P.Act’].

2. Heard Sri O.Manohar Reddy, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri S.M.Subhani, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Sri S.Lakshmi Narayana Reddy, learned counsel for Respondent No.2 and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1/State.

3. Learned