Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Voluntary Health Ass. Of Punjab vs Union Of India . on 25 November, 2014
Bench: Dipak Misra, Uday Umesh Lalit
ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.5 SECTION PIL
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).349/2006
VOLUNTARY HEALTH ASS. OF PUNJAB Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(with appln. (s) for clarification and exemption from filing O.T.
and further direction and permission and office report)
WITH
SLP(Crl) No. 5800/2013
(With Office Report)
W.P.(C) No. 575/2014
(With Office Report)
W.P.(C) No. 341/2008
(With Office Report)
Date : 25/11/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Abhiti Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta,Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Adv.
Ms. Anita Shenoy, Adv.
Ms. Mamta Saxena, Adv.
Mr. Ritwik Parikh, Adv.
Mr. A.N. Singh, Adv.
Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv.
Mr.Kapil Joshi, Adv.
Ms. Manju Jetley,Adv.
Signature Not Verified
For Respondent(s)
Digitally signed by
Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, ASG
Gulshan Kumar Arora
Date: 2014.11.25
17:25:22 IST
Mr. Sunita Sharma, Adv.
Reason:
Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv.
Mr. D.S. Mahra, Adv.
Ms. Atreyi Chatterjee, Adv.
2
Mr. Shaqeel Ahmad, Adv.
Mr. Abhisth Kumar,Adv.
Mr. Anil Kumar Jha,Adv.
Mr. Anil Shrivastav,Adv.
Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Adv.
Mr. Anip Sachthey,Adv.
Ms. Shagun Matta, Adv.
Mr. Saakaar Sardana, Adv.
Mr. B.H. Marlapalle, Sr. Adv.
Ms.Asha Gopalan Nair, Adv.
Ms. Bansuri Swaraj, Adv.
Mr. Annirudh Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Shreya Bhatnagar, Adv.
Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee,Adv.
Mr. Sapam Biswajit Meitei, Adv.
Mr. Z.H. Issac Haiding, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh,Adv.
Mr. Avijit Bhattacharjee,Adv.
Mrs. K. Enatoli Sema, Adv.
Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Balaji Srinivasan,Adv.
Mr. B. Balaji,Adv.
Mr. R. Rakesh Sharma, Adv.
Mr. S. Anand, Adv.
Mr. Paramveer V., Adv.
Mr. B. S. Banthia,Adv.
Mr. D. Babu,Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv.
Mr. Gopal Singh,Adv.
Mr. Chandan Kuamr, Adv.
Mr. Jatinder Kumar Bhatia,Adv.
Mr. Mukesh Verma, Adv.
Mr. Nitin Lonkar, Adv.
Mr. C. Tiwari, Adv.
Mr. Shriram P. Pingle, Adv.
Mr. Jay Kishor Singh,Adv.
Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv.
3
Mr. P. N. Gupta,Adv.
Mr. P. V. Dinesh,Adv.
Mr. Pragyan Sharma, Adv.
Mr. P. V. Yogeswaran,Adv.
Mr. Heshu Kayina, Adv.
Mr. Rajesh Srivastava,Adv.
Mrs. B. Sunita Rao,Adv.
Mr. Shibashish Misra,Adv.
Mr. Shriram P. Pingle,Adv.
Mr. Sunil Fernandes,Adv.
Mr. T. Harish Kumar,Adv.
Mr. T. V. George,Adv.
Mr. V. G. Pragasam,Adv.
Mr. S.J. Aristotle, Adv.
Mr. Prabu Ramasubramanian, Adv.
Mr. V. N. Raghupathy,Adv.
Ms. Anitha Shenoy,Adv.
Ms. C. K. Sucharita,Adv.
Ms. Riku Sarma, Adv.
Ms. Vartika Saray Walia, Adv.
For M/s Corporate Law Group,Adv.
Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv.
Ms. Puja Singh, Adv.
Ms. Preeti Bhardwaj, Adv.
Mr. Giss Antony, Adv.
Ms. Kamini Jaiswal,Adv.
Mr. Suryanarayana Singh, AAG
Ms. Pragati Neekhra,Adv.
Mr. S.S. Shamshery, AAG
Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv.
Ms. Sushma Suri,Adv.
Mr. Bhagwati Prasad, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Pushpinder Singh, Adv.
Mr. Himanshu Singh Dhillon, Adv.
4
Mr. Merusagar Samantaray,Adv.
Mr. A. Mariarputham, AAG Sikkim
Mrs. Aruna Mathur, Adv.
Mr. Yousuf Khan, Adv.
Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Adv.
Mr. Krisha Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Chandar Uday Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv.
Ms. Supriya Jain, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv.
Mr. G.M. Kawoosa, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Mathur, Adv.
Mr. K.V. Jagdishvaran, Adv.
Mrs. G. Indira, Adv.
Mr. Manjit Singh, AAG
Mrs. Nupur Choudhary, Adv.
Mrs. Vivekta Singh, Adv.
Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Bansal, AAG
Mr. Kuldip Singh, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Yadava, Adv.
Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sajjan Poovayya, Adv.
Mr. Priyadarshi Banerjee, Adv.
Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Rishi Agrawala, Adv.
Mr. E.C. Agrawala, Adv.
Mr. Vikrant Pachnanda, Adv.
Mr. Pratyush Panjwani, Adv.
Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, Adv.
Mr. Ram Naresh yadav, Adv.
Mr. Manu Nair, Adv.
Ms. Saanjh N. Purohit, Adv.
Mr. Pardeep Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Parinav Gupta, Adv.
Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Mishra Saurabh, Adv.
Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, Adv.
5
Mr. Ankit Kumar Lal, Adv.
Mr. Arun K. Sinha, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.349/2006, PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CRL) NO.5800/2013 AND WRIT PETITION (C) NO.575/2014 In pursuance of our earlier order, affidavits by certain States have been filed and certain States, by adopting a lackadaisical attitude, have not filed the affidavits. The States, namely, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Bihar, Goa, Gujarat, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Orissa, Tripura, and UT of Daman and Nagar Haveli and Puducherry have not filed the affidavits. This attitude is not appreciated. However, they shall file their respective affidavits within two weeks hence.
As advised at present, we are inclined to think that the suggestions we had recorded in our previous order shall be adverted to in respect of cluster of States first. To elaborate, we shall deal with the problem that has occurred by dividing the States into certain clusters. Presently, we have decided to deal with the controversy pertaining to the States of Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and NCT of Delhi.
On a perusal of the affidavit of the State of Uttar Pradesh, we find that the affidavit is absolutely non-informative from all corners. A census chart of 2011 has been filed. We are absolutely unimpressed by the chart given during the census conducted in 2011 relating to the sex ratio that cannot be the guideline for the purposes of PC-PNDT Act. There has to be a different methodology to be adopted by the State. We would be failing in our duty if we do not refer to para 28 of the affidavit. It reads as follows :
“28. That it is pertinent to mention herein that according to “ANNUAL HEALTH SURVEY (AHS)” for the year 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13, improvement has been revealed in the State in respect of Sex Ratio At Birth, Sex Ratio of Child (0 to 04 years age) and Sex Ratio in all age group, which is clear with the table given below:
Year of Annual Health Sex Ratio Sex Ratio Sex Ratio Survey (At Birth) (0 to 04 (In all Years of ages) 6 Age) 2010-11 904 913 943 2011-12 908 914 944 2012-13 921 919 946” On a query being made by the Court, learned counsel for the State was not in a position to explain on what basis the said figures have been arrived at, for the same is not reflectible from the assertions made in the affidavit.
As far as the State of Haryana is concerned, though the affidavit appears to be comprehensive, the chart given in paragraph 15 of the affidavit gives district-wise and month-wise sex ratio of births during the year 2014. It is as follows :
“District wise and month wise Sex Ratio at Birth during year 2014 in Haryana State as per CRS (Prov) Sr. District up to up to Up to Up to Up to Up to No. Jan.14 Feb.14 March April May June 2014 2014 2014 2014 1 Ambala 1012 993 959 939 913 910 2 Bhiwani 824 812 843 848 846 832 3 Faridabad 929 892 889 884 890 890 4 Fatehabad 859 898 890 888 886 874 5 Gurgaon 829 856 851 854 855 839 6 Hissar 892 872 883 878 885 880 7 Jhajjar 797 793 793 801 800 811 8 Jind 886 876 878 911 915 899 9 Kaithal 953 921 920 928 927 918 10 Karnal 911 899 888 881 889 894 11 Kurukshetra 956 904 900 892 890 888 12 Mewat 920 942 932 923 920 919 13 Mohindergarh 777 776 797 786 782 770 14 Palwal 867 871 871 871 876 875 15 Panchkula 853 837 860 914 902 914 16 Panipat 924 931 915 904 903 895 17 Rewari 856 850 849 822 816 806 18 Rohtak 894 884 865 863 859 889 7 19 Sirsa 897 872 879 885 892 886 20 Sonepat 859 884 850 838 834 835 21 Yamunanagar 906 940 916 897 894 869 Haryana 889 884 881 878 878 874” State Nothing has been filed stating as to how this figure has been reached except making a statement that the base is of certain registers.
On a perusal of the affidavit by the State of Delhi, we find in paragraph 5, it has been stated, thus :
“5. It is submitted that Sex Ratio at Birth in Delhi, which is a reliable indicator of violations under the PC & PNDT Act, has improved by 9 points in 2013 over the previous year. The data available from Civil Registration System indicates that Sex Ratio at Birth was 809 females per 1000 males in the year 2001 and it is currently at 895 in 2013 Annexure R-I.” A document has been filed as indicated therein supporting the same.
In our considered opinion, there should be a verification of the documents that form the basis on which these figures have been arrived at. Let it be clarified that the figures that have been put forth do not show any indication of improvement but we would like to have it verified to satisfy ourselves whether the figure that has been put forth is correct or not. The purpose is to find out whether there is degradation of the sex ratio or a stagnation or any steps have really been taken by the concerned States to improve/enhance the sex ratio or not?
In view of the aforesaid, we direct that a meeting be held under the auspices of National Inspection and Monitoring Committee wherein the Additional Secretary who has filed the affidavit for the Union of India and two other Joint Secretaries of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare shall remain present. The deponents who have filed the affidavits before this Court on behalf of the States of Uttar Pradesh and NCT of Delhi shall remain present. The Director General, Health Services, State of Haryana shall remain present in the meeting The Principal Secretary along with the Special Secretary, State of Uttar Pradesh shall remain present in the meeting.To avoid any amount of controversy, we fix the date for the meeting on 03.12.2014 at 10.30 a.m. The State shall produce the relevant registers/records before the said Committee.8
We are sure, the States should be in a position to produce the registers/record in the meeting so that it can be scrutinized. Any discrepancy in this respect shall not be appreciated for the States must have prepared the chart on the basis of the such registers/records.
We recapitulate the saying, “Awake, Arise, Oh ! Parth” and we say this to the States so that they can really wake up to take the issue of female foeticide with all seriousness and sincere concern.
As requested by Mr. Gonsalves and Mr. Parekh that they should be allowed to be present at the meeting and we permit them to participate.
The report shall be filed before this Court by 10.12.2014.
Apart from the child sex-ratio, the aforesaid three States shall also bring records with regard to the prosecutions levied by the State yearwise and the stage of the prosecution.
The next States shall be addressed to for this limited purpose are the States of Tamil Nadu, Himachal Pradesh, Bihar and Rajasthan.
At this juncture, without expressing any opinion, we would require the States to give suggestions by a separate affidavit, if some incentives can be given to the family who show respect and honour for the girl child and give birth to girl child so that the sex ratio is improved.
Learned counsel Mr. Gonsalves shall file a status report by giving a compilation of convenience in respect of all the States.
Let the matter be listed on 11.12.2014.
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.341 OF 2008 Let the matter be listed on 04.12.2014. Let a copy of the writ petition shall be sent to the Central Agency to be given to the Solicitor General of India.
Mr. Kaul, learned Additional Solicitor General would apprise the learned Solicitor General about the issue in question.
(Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher)
Court Master Court Master