Karnataka High Court
Dr Harish H vs The State Appropriate Authority Saa on 22 April, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:22071
WP No. 8806 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 8806 OF 2025 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
DR. HARISH H
S/O. M. HUCCHEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
NO. 322, 5TH MAIN
19TH CROSS, BEML LAYOUT
1ST STAGE, BANGALORE NORTH
BANGALORE-560 079
THE PROPRIETOR OF
SRI LAKSHMI DIAGNOSTIC CENTER
OPP: GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL
B.M. ROAD, NAGAMANGALA
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 432.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NAIK VENKATRAMAN NAGAPPA., ADVOCATE)
Digitally AND:
signed by
CHAITHRA A
1. THE STATE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY (SAA)
Location:
HIGH P.C AND P.N.D.T.,
COURT OF OFFICE OF STATE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY
KARNATAKA STATE PC AND PNDT CELL
DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH AND
FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES
AROGYA SOUDHA, 2ND FLOOR
MAGADI MAIN ROAD
BENGALURU-560 023.
2. THE DISTRICT APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY
(DAA) P.C. AND P.N.D.T
REPRESENTED BY
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:22071
WP No. 8806 of 2025
HC-KAR
MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA-571 401.
3. THE DISTRICT FAMILY
WELFARE OFFICER
MANDYA DISTRICT
DISTRICT HEALTH AND
FAMILY WELFARE OFFICE
OLD MC ROAD, MANDYA-571 401.
4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
AND APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY
AT SUB-DISTRICT LEVEL
P.C. AND P.N.D.T
PANDAVAPURA SUB DIVISION
PANDAVAPURA
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 434.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. ADITYA DIWAKAR, AGA)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS PERTAINS TO THE INSPECTION CONDUCTED ON THE
PETITIONERS DIAGNOSTIC CENTER ON 14.12.2023 AS PER
ANNEXURE-E BY THE DISTRICT FAMILY WELFARE OFFICER
AND THE IMPUGNED MAHAZAR AND SEIZURE DATED
19.12.2023 CONDUCTED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT AS
PER ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:22071
WP No. 8806 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner, a qualified Radiologist having completed MBBS and Post-Graduation in Radiology, is running a diagnostic centre under the name and style 'Sri Lakshmi Diagnostic Centre'. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had obtained necessary registration under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (for short, PC & PNDT Act) and the registration stood renewed and is valid up to 28.06.2026. The petitioner also possesses requisite licences under the Karnataka Private Medical Establishments (Amendment) Act, 2018 and Rules, 2018.
2. On 14.12.2023, the District Inspection and Monitoring Committee (DIMC), Mandya, conducted an inspection of the petitioner's diagnostic centre. Pursuant to the inspection, it was alleged that there was non- maintenance of scan images in the system, which was treated as a violation under Section 29(1) of the PC & -4- NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR PNDT Act. Thereafter, the respondents conducted a search and seizure and sealed the diagnostic centre under a mahazar dated 19.12.2023 (Annexure-F).
3. It is the specific grievance of the petitioner that though the diagnostic centre was sealed in December 2023, no further action as contemplated under the Act has been initiated by the respondents, particularly the filing of a private complaint before the jurisdictional Court by the competent authority. The petitioner further contends that the search and seizure are vitiated for non-compliance of Rule 12 of the PC & PNDT Rules, 1996, and also for want of proper authorization by the Appropriate Authority as mandated under Section 30(1) of the Act.
4. The search is illegal and contrary to Rule 12, as it was not conducted in the presence of independent witnesses. There was no valid decision of the Appropriate Authority under Section 30(1) authorising the search. The alleged violation, even if accepted, would fall within -5- NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR Section 25 (general penalty), and not warrant sealing of the establishment indefinitely. The petitioner had maintained manual records and the absence of images was due to system failure. Despite seizure in 2023, no complaint has been filed, rendering the continued sealing arbitrary and violative of Article 19(1)(g). The petitioner has admitted lapse in reply to show cause notice (Annexure-H). Non-maintenance of records/images is a serious violation under Section 29. The action is justified to ensure compliance with the object of the Act.
5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Perused the records. The following points would arise for consideration:
(i) Whether the search and seizure conducted on 19.12.2023 is in compliance with the mandate of Section 30(1) of the PC & PNDT Act and Rule 12 of the Rules?-6-
NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR
(ii) Whether the continued sealing of the petitioner's diagnostic centre without initiating prosecution is sustainable in law?
(iii) Whether the petitioner is entitled for quashing of the mahazar and consequential relief of de-sealing?
Finding on Point No.(i):
6. At the outset, it is necessary to extract and examine the statutory framework governing search and seizure under the PC & PNDT Act. Section 30(1) of the PC and PNDT Act would be relevant. The same is extracted which reads as under:
"30. Power to Search and Seize records, etc.-
(1) If the Appropriate Authority has reason to believe that an offence under this Act has been or is being committed at any Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory or Genetic Clinic or any other place, such Authority or any officer authorized thereof in this behalf may, subject to such rules as may be prescribed, enter and search at all reasonable times with such assistance, if any, as such Authority or officer considers necessary, such Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory or Genetic Clinic or any other place and examine any -7- NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR record, register, document, book, pamphlet, advertisement or any other material object found therein and seize and seal the same if such Authority or officer has reason to believe that it may furnish evidence of the commission of an offence punishable under this Act."
7. The object of Section 30 is twofold: a) to empower the authority to act swiftly in cases of suspected sex selection practices, and b) to simultaneously incorporate safeguards against arbitrary invasion into medical establishments.
8. The expression "Appropriate Authority has reason to believe" is not an empty formality. It mandates formation of objective satisfaction, based on tangible material, and collective decision-making by the statutory authority. This statutory safeguard ensures that power is not exercised in a unilateral or mechanical manner, thereby protecting professionals from arbitrary harassment.
-8-
NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR
9. In Ravinder Kumar vs. State of Haryana1, the Hon'ble Apex Court, while interpreting Section 30(1), has held that the decision to conduct a search must be that of the Appropriate Authority as a body, and a search authorised by a single member or officer is illegal and vitiated. The Hon'ble Apex Court further emphasized that "If the law requires a thing to be done in a particular manner, it must be done in that manner alone."
10. In the present case, this Court finds that there is no material indicating a collective decision of the Appropriate Authority and there is no record of "reason to believe" formed in the manner contemplated under Section 30(1). The action appears to be a routine inspection followed by mechanical seizure, which is impermissible.
1 2024 SCC Online SC 2495 -9- NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR
11. It would be apposite for this Court to extract Rule 12 of PC & PNDT Rules, 1996. The same reads as under:
"12. Procedure for search and seizure.(1) The Appropriate Authority or any officer authorised in this behalf may enter and search at all reasonable times any Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic, Imaging Centre or Ultrasound Clinic in the presence of two or more independent witnesses for the purposes of search and examination of any record, register, document, book, pamphlet, advertisement, or any other material object found therein and seal and seize the same if there is reason to believe that it may furnish evidence of commission of an offence punishable under the Act.
Explanation. In these Rules-
(1)'Genetic Laboratory/Genetic Clinic/Genetic Counselling Centre' would include an Ultrasound Centre/Imaging Centre/nursing home/hospital/institute or any other place, by whatever name called, where any of the machines or equipments capable of selection of sex before or after conception or performing any procedure technique or test for pre-natal detection of sex of foetus, is used;
(2) 'material object' would include records, machines and equipments; and (3) 'seize' and 'seizure' would include 'seal' and 'sealing' respectively.] (2) A list of any document, record, register, book, pamphlet, advertisement or any other material object found in the [Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic, Ultrasound Clinic and Imaging Centre) and seized shall be prepared in duplicate at the place of effecting the seizure. Both copies of such list shall be signed on every page by the Appropriate Authority or the officer
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR authorised in this behalf and by the witnesses to the seizure:
Provided that the list may be prepared, in the presence of the witnesses, at a place other than the place of seizure if, for reasons to be recorded in writing, it is not practicable to make the list at the place of effecting the seizure.
(3) One copy of the list referred to in sub-rule (2) shall be handed over, under acknowledgement, to the person from whose custody the document, record, register, book, pamphlet advertisement or any other material object have been seized:
Provided that a copy of the list of such document, record, register, book, pamphlet, advertisement or other material object seized may be delivered under acknowledgement, or sent by registered post to the owner or manager of the Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic, Ultrasound Clinic and Imaging Centre), if no person acknowledging custody of the document, record, register, book, pamphlet, advertisement or other material object seized is available at the place of effecting the seizure.
(4) If any material object seized is perishable in nature, the Appropriate Authority, or the officer authorised in this behalf shall make arrangements promptly for sealing, identification and preservation of the material object and also convey it to a facility for analysis or test, if analysis or test be required:
Provided that the refrigerator or other equipment used by the [Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic, Ultrasound Clinic and Imaging Centre] for preserving such perishable material object may be sealed until such time as arrangements can be made for safe removal of such perishable material object and in such eventuality, mention of keeping the material object seized, on the premises of the Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory or Genetic Clinic shall be made in the list of seizure.
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR (5) In the case of non-completion of search and seizure operation, the Appropriate Authority or the officer authorized in this behalf may make arrangements, by way of mounting a guard or sealing of the premises of the [Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic, Ultrasound Clinic and Imaging Centre), for safe keeping, listing and removal of documents, records, book or any other material object to be seized, and to prevent any tampering with such documents, records, books or any other material object."
12. Rule 12 mandates that search shall be conducted in the presence of two or more independent witnesses; A list of documents and materials seized shall be prepared and signed; Procedural safeguards akin to criminal jurisprudence must be adhered to. Rule 12 is a procedural safeguard intended to ensure transparency in search operations, prevent fabrication or manipulation of records, and protect the rights of medical practitioners from coercive and opaque actions.
13. In the present case, the petitioner has specifically pleaded absence of independent witnesses; there is no material to demonstrate compliance with Rule
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR
12. Thus, the search is vitiated on procedural as well as jurisdictional grounds.
Accordingly, Point No.(i) is answered in the Negative.
Finding on Point No.(ii):
14. To appreciate this issue, it is necessary to examine the statutory scheme relating to maintenance of records and penalties. Section 29(1) of the PC and PNDT Act would be relevant. The same is extracted which reads as under:
"29. Maintenance of Records:
(1) All records, charts, forms, reports, consent letters and all other documents required to be maintained under this Act and the rules shall be preserved for a period of two years or for such period as may be prescribed:
Provided that, if any criminal or other proceedings are instituted against any Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory and Genetic Clinic, the records and all other documents of such Centre, Laboratory or Clinic shall be preserved till the final disposal of such proceedings."
- 13 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR
15. The provision ensures Traceability of diagnostic procedures, Prevention of sex determination practices, and Maintenance of accountability in medical establishments.
Non-compliance constitutes a violation; however, the consequence must follow statutory procedure.
16. It would be also apposite for this Court to extract Section 25 of the PC and PNDT Act. The same reads as under:
"25. Penalty for contravention of the provisions of the Act or rules for which no specific punishment is provided.-
Whoever contravenes any of the provisions of this Act or any rules made thereunder, for which no penalty has been elsewhere provided in this Act, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine, which may extend to one thousand rupees or with both and in the case of continuing contravention with an additional fine which may extend to five hundred rupees for every day during which such contravention continues after conviction for the first such contravention."
17. Section 25 acts as a residuary penal provision, indicating that not every violation warrants drastic
- 14 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR coercive action and minor or technical breaches are to be dealt with proportionately through prosecution before a competent Court. Prosecution must be initiated by filing a complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate. The authority cannot assume the role of adjudicator and punisher simultaneously. Seizure is only a temporary measure, not a substitute for prosecution.
18. Admittedly the diagnostic centre was sealed in December 2023. Even after more than one year, no complaint is filed. A report is submitted only in July 2024, without consequential action.
19. This Court finds that the respondents have invoked coercive powers without following through with statutory obligations; The action amounts to indefinite sealing without adjudication, which is unknown to law; Such conduct results in civil consequences of the gravest nature, including loss of livelihood.
- 15 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR
20. The petitioner's right to practice profession is protected under Article 19(1)(g). Any restriction must be reasonable, proportionate, and in accordance with procedure established by law. The present action fails all three tests. The continued sealing of the petitioner's diagnostic centre is arbitrary and disproportionate, contrary to the statutory scheme, and amounts to abuse of power.
Accordingly, point No.(ii) is answered in the Negative.
Finding on Point No.(iii):
21. Given the findings, the search is vitiated for non-compliance of Section 30 and Rule 12; the seizure is unsustainable in absence of lawful prosecution; and the continued sealing is illegal and violative of fundamental rights.
- 16 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR Accordingly, point No.(iii) is answered in the Affirmative.
22. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed;
(ii) The mahazar and seizure dated 19.12.2023 (Annexure-F) are hereby quashed;
(iii) The respondents are directed to forthwith de-seal the petitioner's diagnostic centre, namely "Sri Lakshmi Diagnostic Centre", and permit resumption of operations;
(iv) It is made clear that if the respondents intend to proceed against the petitioner, they shall do so strictly in accordance with the procedure contemplated under the PC & PNDT Act, 1994, including initiation of prosecution by filing a complaint before the competent Court;
- 17 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22071 WP No. 8806 of 2025 HC-KAR
(v) Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to seek damages before an appropriate forum in accordance with law.
Sd/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 102