Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Index to the Judgment FACTUAL BACKGROUND .................................................................... 3 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS ............................................................... 6 THE HISTORIC BACKDROP ................................................................ 9 ISSUES BEFORE THIS COURT .......................................................... 12 I. Cognizance of Offences under Section 28....................................... 12 II. Is Police Investigation permissible under PC&PNDT Act? ............ 17 III. Quashing of FIR in a case under PC&PNDT Act ........................... 23 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:2718 OBSERVATIONS OF THE COURT APROPOS THE NEED TO CLARIFY CERTAIN PROVISIONS AND PROCEDURES UNDER THE ACT .................................................................................................. 29 I. Joint Endeavour of Judiciary, Legislature and Executive to achieve Object of the Act..................................................................................... 30 II. Impact Assessment of Laws, Practical Difficulties and Consequent Development of Jurisprudence by the Courts ........................................ 34 III. Judicial, Institutional and Constitutional Restraint by the Courts Vs. Pointing out the Grey Areas in an Act for the Legislature to cure for achieving Substantive Justice ................................................................. 36 IV. Backdrop of Reasons Necessitating Issuance of Guidelines Apropos the Act: Quest for Substantive Justice .................................................... 40 a. Need for Safe Womb for Female Foetus: Sex- Determination Tests directly related to Sex-Selective Abortions ........................................ 41 CONCLUSION AND DIRECTIONS .................................................... 45 SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.

10. It is also argued that as per provisions contained in Section 17(4) of PC&PNDT Act, only Appropriate Authority is authorised to carry out the investigation with respect to breach of provisions of the Act and Rules framed thereunder and the police has no role therein. It is stated that Appropriate Authority has been vested with ample powers in this regard by virtue of Section 17, 17A, 20 and 30 of the Act. It is stated that police is not competent to investigate cognizable offences under PC&PNDT Act and since in the present case, a major part of investigation had been conducted by police officials, it is against the intent and spirit of the Act. It is further stated that the Act is a special NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:2718 legislation and is governed by its own provisions, which would prevail over a general law i.e, Cr.P.C. It is also stated that Rule 18A(3) of Pre- conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Rules, 1996 (hereinafter 'PC&PNDT Rules') expressly provides that police cannot be involved in cases falling under PC&PNDT Act, which can well be appreciated given the nature of offences which are committed by various medical techniques and equipment with which ordinary police may not be fully conversant. It is, thus, stated that all the investigation carried out by the police stands vitiated.

14. Learned APP for the State further states that involvement of the police is not barred under the Act. It is also stated that offences under PC&PNDT Act are cognizable, non-bailable and non-compoundable in nature as provided under Section 27 and the power of arrest in cognizable cases vests with the police only since no such power has been vested in the Appropriate Authority by virtue of PC&PNDT Act. It is vehemently argued that the words 'as far as possible' in Rule 18A(3) of PC&PNDT Rules would show that the role of police in investigating cases under the Act and assisting the Appropriate Authority is not ruled out per se, and it is only the 'cognizance' which is to be taken by the Courts as per Section 28 of the Act. 



                          ISSUES BEFORE THIS COURT

                           I.    Cognizance of Offences under Section 28

25. The core legal issue before this Court, raised by way of present petition, is whether the learned Trial Court could have taken cognizance of an offence under this Act in view of Section 28 of PC&PNDT Act on the basis of a chargesheet filed by the police.

26. At the outset, it will be pertinent to take note of Section 28 of the PC&PNDT Act, which is at the heart of the entire controversy. The same is extracted as under: