A single judge of AP High Court, relying on A Subash Babu judgment from Supreme Court here (referred to a partially perverse decision of AP HC here), held as follows,

From Para 10,

10. Chapter XIV of Code of Criminal Procedure provides for conditions requisite for initiation of proceedings. Section 198 Sub-Section (1) proviso (c) Cr.P.C. provides that for a prosecution of an accused for an offence under Section 494 I.P.C. it shall be initiated by a complaint made by the aggrieved
person namely the wife or on her behalf by her father, mother and other relations mentioned therein. Section 2(d) of Code of Criminal Procedure defines a ‘complaint’ showing that a complaint shall be made to a Magistrate and it does not include a police report. Thus, a complaint is different from police report. In terms of Section 198 of Code of Criminal Procedure, prosecution for the offence under Section 494 I.P.C. could be initiated only by a complaint filed before the learned Magistrate. In the case at hand, the proceedings that were initiated before learned Magistrate were not out of a complaint filed before him. The case emerged on a police report. On these suppositions, one could say that the very initiation of prosecution is incorrect and against law. However, State of Andhra Pradesh passed Act 3 of 1992. By virtue of that, entry relating to Section 494 I.P.C. as mentioned in Schedule-1 of Code of Criminal Procedure at Column Nos.4 and 5 certain changes were brought in. This amendment made the offence under Section 494 I.P.C. cognizable and non-bailable. Be it noted that in terms of Section 2(c) of Code of Criminal Procedure, a cognizable offence means a case in which a police officer is entitled to arrest accused without any warrant issued by the Court. Be it also noted that Section 198 Cr.P.C. was not amended for Andhra Pradesh State. A plain reading of these provisions give an impression that Section 198 Cr.P.C. bar still holds good and therefore a prosecution for an offence under Section 494 I.P.C. could be done only by a complainant through her complaint and not by way of a police report/charge sheet. It seems this view was followed in B.Parvathi v. State of Andhra Pradesh1. However, these aspects were clarified and law was laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in A.Subhash Babu v. State of A.P.2. At para No.46 of the judgment, their Lordships have laid the law that by virtue of the said amendment for State of Andhra Pradesh carried out in the first schedule of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the bar contained in Section 198 Cr.P.C. for the offence under Section 494 I.P.C. gets lifted. In that view of the matter, one could say that prosecution in this State for an offence under Section 494 I.P.C. is possible either by a complaint or by a police report.

Citations: [2023 Latest Caselaw 3883 AP]

Other Sources:

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/39334506/

https://www.latestlaws.com/judgements/andhra-high-court/2023/august/2023-latest-caselaw-3883-ap

Index of 494 IPC Judgments is here.