Case Note & Summary
Two doctors, who operated a diagnostic centre, faced criminal proceedings under the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994. The District Appropriate Authority conducted an inspection of the centre on 08-12-2023 at 4.00 p.m. and found several irregularities. The ultrasound room was open and the machine was in active mode. Lab technicians admitted that scanning was performed without generating Form F as required by the Act. Upon inspection, no patient details or images were stored, and signatures of four patients were missing from Form F. The petitioners contended that signatures were taken in a register rather than on the forms, and that all scanning was done pursuant to medical prescriptions. They argued that the inspection was procedurally flawed, as a show cause notice was issued after seizure and locking of the ultrasound machine. The state maintained that patient signatures on Form F are mandatory and that any violation warranted prosecution. The court examined the complaint and noted that the core issue revolved around compliance with Form F requirements. The judgment excerpt ends before a final decision is rendered, leaving the outcome undetermined. The petition sought quashing of the proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Headnote
A) Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques - Compliance with Form-F - Sections 20, 23, 28 of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 - Petition to quash complaint alleging missing patient signatures on Form-F and other irregularities - Court noted that Form-F requires patient signatures and that the Appropriate Authority filed complaint under Section 28 after inspection - (Paras 1-11).
Issue of Consideration
Whether proceedings under Sections 20(1)(2)(3) and 23(1)(2) of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 were liable to be quashed for alleged irregularities in maintenance of Form-F including missing patient signatures.
Law Points
- Mandatory compliance with Form-F under PC-PNDT Act
- requirement of patient signature on Form-F
- inspection and complaint procedure under Section 28
- quashing of proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Case Details
2024 LawText (KAR) (08) 28
Criminal Petition No. 3002 of 2024
Praveen S. for petitioners, B.N. Jagadeesh for respondents
Dr. Smt. Subhalakshmi N., Dr. Moscow Mani S.
State by District Appropriate Authority (DAA) PC and PNDT, Dr. Ravindranath M. Meti
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash complaint for offences under PC-PNDT Act.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of proceedings in C.C. No. 1938/2024.
Filing Reason
Alleged irregularities in maintaining Form-F records, including missing patient signatures, leading to complaint by Appropriate Authority.
Issues
Whether the criminal proceedings under Sections 20 and 23 of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 are liable to be quashed for procedural lapses in inspection and maintenance of Form-F records.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners: Signatures of patients were taken in the register, not on Form-F; scanning was done with prescriptions; inspection conducted at 4.00 p.m. when no records were displayed; notice issued post-seizure; guidelines of Government of India not followed.
Respondents: Signatures on Form-F are mandatory under the Act; scanning without consent violates the Act; guidelines adopted by State; petitioners should face trial.
Judgment Excerpts
The Ultrasound room is located opposite to the Reception. The ultrasound room was open when team visited the Centre and the USG machine was in the active mode. Mis/Mrs Jenifer & Karthik (Lab Tech.) accepted that scanning was done without generating Form F as per the PC and PNDT Act.
The signature of the Patient was not found in the Form-F i) The patient Signature was not found in Form-F name of the patients Neelam aged: 31 years Dated 13-11-2023, Ayesha aged 24 years, Dated: 26-11-2023; Rashmitha aged 31 years Dated 26-11-2023; Ramani aged 30 years Dated 27-11-2023
Procedural History
Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by petitioners seeking quashing of complaint in C.C. No. 1938/2024 pending before Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court-I, Mayo Hall, Bangalore, for offences under Sections 20 and 23 of the PC-PNDT Act. The complaint was filed by the District Appropriate Authority after inspection on 08-12-2023. The High Court heard arguments and reserved judgment on 30.07.2024; order pronounced on 09.08.2024.
Acts & Sections
- Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994: 20(1), 20(2), 20(3), 23(1), 23(2), 28, 3A, 4, 5, 6, 29, 30
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 482, 200
