Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Natal Diagnostic Technic (Prohibition) and Sex Selection) Act. 1994 (in short 'PC & PNDT Act) and Rules 9(1)(3)(4) and 10(1) of its rules of 1996 punishable under Section 25 of PC & PNDT Act.

2. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner Dr. Nayna Bansal a practicing gynecologist was running her nursing home under the name and style of Jagdamba Hospital and Ultrasound Center, in area of Sabzi Mandi, Karnal. The said nursing home was duly registered under the provisions of PC & PNDT Act. On 09.01.2016, a team comprising of Dr. Rajinder Kumar, Deputy Civil Surgeon, Karnal, Dr. Kranti, Medical Officer, Sector- 13, Civil Dispensary, Karnal and Gurcharan Singh, Drug Control Officer, Karnal was deputed to raid the nursing home of the petitioner Dr. Nayna Bansal, on the basis of secret information received regarding sex determination tests conducted in the said nursing home. A decoy patient namely Sarita (a pregnant lady) was selected. The said decoy patient contacted another accused Renu (petitioner in CRM-M-27226-2021) through Smt. Vimal a social worker. The deal was struck for Rs.14000/- to conduct sex determination test of foetus of Sarita in aforesaid nursing home. 14 currency notes of denomination of Rs.1000/- each bearing specific serial numbers were handed over to decoy patient and further paid to Renu (a tout) through Smt. Vimal. Then Dr. Nayna Bansal conducted sex determination test of unborn baby in the womb of Sarita, but no entry with regard to said test was made in the record maintained in the nursing home. The report regarding sex of the unborn child was handed over to the decoy patient through Renu and on receiving the signal, the aforesaid team reached the said nursing home but Dr. Nayna Bansal was not found present. Even her 2 of 10 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:134080 CRM-M-45108-2016 & CRM-M-27226-2021 [3] mobile phone was found switched off. The team with the help of police officials made enquiry from Renu. On search of the purse of Renu, four currency notes of denomination of Rs.1000/- each, worth Rs.4000/- were found. The serial numbers matched with the currency notes which were handed over to decoy patient for handing over the same to Renu as charges for getting conducted sex determination test. The said currency notes worth Rs.4000/- and certain other documents found in the purse were seized by the aforesaid medical team. The room where ultrasound machine was installed was opened by the team in presence of Dr. Sanjay Bansal husband of Dr. Nayna Bansal and the record lying in the said room was also seized by the medical team. On checking of the said record, it was found that no entry was made in the said record regarding ultrasound examination of Sarita, a decoy patient. Sarita disclosed to the medical team that Dr. Nayna Bansal conducted her ultrasound without getting her past history and without making any entry of her name in the concerned register and other record of the nursing home. The ultrasound machine used for conducting sex determination test of Sarita was sealed in presence of Sulek Kumar and Harish Chander Singh.

3. A first information report having No.51 dated 10.01.2016 was also registered in Police Station Karnal City, alleging the commission of offence punishable under Section 23 of PC & PNDT Act. It was followed by a complaint Annexure P-7 filed by the District Appropriate Authority under Section 28 (1) of PC & PNDT Act, in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal alleging the commission of offences against Dr. Nayna Bansal and Renu. The allegation against both of them was that they were 3 of 10 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:134080 CRM-M-45108-2016 & CRM-M-27226-2021 [4] involved in illegal act of sex determination of unborn child by doing ultrasound test.

4. After completion of investigation, police presented final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C in the Court concerned.

5. The counsel for the petitioners while challenging the aforesaid proceedings including complaint Annexure P-7/Annexure P-6 and FIR Annexure P-4, have inter alia contended that the raiding team was having no jurisdiction to raid the nursing home of Dr. Nayna Bansal. The said team was not duly constituted and authorized by District Appropriate Authority as per the provisions of Section 17 of PC & PNDT Act. The police was having no jurisdiction to investigate the matter as Section 28 of PC & PNDT Act provides that no Court shall take cognizance of offence under this Act except on a complaint made by the District Appropriate Authority.

19. Consequently, both the petitions are allowed and criminal complaint No.59 of 2016 titled State through Dr. Sant Lal Verma, Chairperson, District Appropriate Authority-cum-Civil Surgeon, Karnal Vs. Dr. Naina Bansal and another under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Pre- Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Technic (Prohibition) and Sex Selection) Act. 1994 and Rules 9(1)(3)(4) and 10(1) of its rules of 1996 punishable under Section 25 of PC & PNDT Act and all the subsequent proceedings arising thereof are quashed. FIR No.51 dated 10.01.2016, registered in Police Station Karnal City, under Sections 23 of PC & PNDT Act is also quashed.