ORDER :

Y. Lakshmana Rao, J.

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 Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 & 3 in C.C.No.2656 of 2021 on the file of the learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam(for brevity, ‘the learned Trial Court’).

2. Notice to Respondent No.2 was sent, and a memo to that effect has been filed. There is no representation for Respondent No.2. Hence, a learned legal aid counsel is appointed to argue the case on behalf of Respondent No.2, for the ends of justice as no prejudice is caused to Respondent No.2. Hence, Mr.Lenin Babu, learned counsel, is appointed as learned legal aid counsel for Respondent No.2 in this case. The Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, is directed to issue necessary proceedings in this regard.

3. Heard learned counsel for Petitioners, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned legal aid counsel for Respondent No.2. Perused the record.

4. Mr. P. Anand Seshu, learned counsel for the Petitioners, submits that Petitioner No.1/Accused No.2 is the mother in law of Respondent No.2, and Petitioner No.2/Accused No.3 is the brother i‑n l‑aw. The Petitioners have been residing separately in Vijayawada, away ‑ fr‑om the matrimonial home of Accused No.1 and Respondent No.2, and had no role in their day to day affairs. There are no specific references to the date, time, or place ‑of ‑any alleged offences attributed to them. The marriage itself was performed with pooled contributions from well wishers due to the poverty of Respondent No.2’s family, and no dowry ‑ was ever given. Hence, the question of demanding additional dowry does not arise. The allegations in the complaint and charge sheet are vague, omnibus, and motivated, and continuation of proceedings against the Petitioners amounts to abuse of process of law.

5. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, submits that Respondent No.2 was subjected to cruelty and harassment not only by Accused No.1 but also by the Petitioners. It is contended that specific allegations were made against them, and though they reside separately, they frequently visited the matrimonial home, abused Respondent No.2 and her daughter, and even attempted physical assault.

6. Mr.Lenin Babu, learned legal aid counsel for Respondent No.2, argued on the same lines as the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, supporting the allegations of harassment and opposing the quash petition.

7. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record.

8. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of the learned Counsel for both the sides, now the point for consideration is:

“Whether the proceedings in C.C.No.4 of 2025 on the file of the learned II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada are liable to be quashed in exercise of the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of 'the Cr.P.C.,' /Section 528 of 'the BNSS' ?”

9. In this regard, it is apposite to refer to the Judgment of the High Court of Allahabad, in Mukesh Bansal v. State of U.P, 2022 SCC OnLine All 395 at paragraph Nos.48 and 49, held as under:

“48. Thus assesing the totality of the circumstances, object and the allegation of misuse of this piece of legislation in a shape of Section 498A IPC, the Court is proposing the safeguards after taking the guidace from the judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar v. Union of India (Supra) keeping in view the growing tendency in the masses to nail the husband and all family members by a general and sweeping allegations.

49. Thus, It is directed that:—

(i) No arrest or police action to nab the named accused persons shall be made after lodging of the FIR or complaints w