Quashed

Dr. Swati Abaso Gaikwad v. Dr. Vaishali Jadhav and Anr.

Bombay HC23 Mar 2015WP/4848/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal writ petition, the bench quashed criminal proceedings against a petitioner facing trial for alleged violations of the PC-PNDT Act. The court held that the complaint contained no specific factual allegations or dates, rendering the case vague and absurd, and there was no basis to hold the petitioner liable for the center's failure to report resignation.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings under Regular Criminal Case No.136 of 2012 for offences under the PC-PNDT Act and IPC sections 34 are quashed. Bail bond is cancelled.

Dr. Swati Abaso Gaikwad Vs Dr. Vaishali… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

3_wp_4848_2014.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.4848 OF 2014

¶3

Dr. Swati Abaso Gaikwad

¶4

...Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Dr. Vaishali Jadhav, Assistant MOH (Licences) And Appropriate Authority PCPNDT Pune Municipal …. Respondents Corporation Pune & Anr.

¶7

Mr. S.S. Kulkarni for Petitioner. Mr. R.M. Pethe for Respondent No.1. Mr. A.R. Patil, APP for Respondent No.2-State.

¶8

CORAM:-M.L. TAHALIYANI, J. DATED : 23^rd MARCH, 2015.

¶9

P.C. :

¶10

Heard. Admit. By consent of the parties taken up

¶11

forthwith for final hearing.

¶12

The Petitioner is facing trial for the offences under PreConception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the 'PC-PNDT Act') in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Pune. Particularly the allegations

¶13

against the Petitioner are that she had not filled up Form 'F' properly

¶14

megha Page No.1 of 3

¶15

3_wp_4848_2014.doc

¶16

before taking the patient for sonology. Other main allegation against the Petitioner is that though she claims to have resigned in the month of August, 2008 her resignation was not reported to competent authority in Form 'A' by the Diagnostic Centre.

¶17

I have gone through the complaint. There is no specific allegation against the Petitioner at all. As far as submitting change report is concerned it is the duty of the Diagnostic Centre for which the Applicant cannot be held responsible. As regards not filling up Form 'F' properly is concerned, I do not find any allegation in the complaint. Learned counsel for the Municipal corporation, Pune, has not been able to show as to on which date the Petitioner has performed sonology on a particular patient and the Form 'F' was not filled in properly. Vague and absurd allegations will not make out the case against the Petitioner.

¶18

It may be mentioned here that the complainant is under obligation to give detailed facts of the case so that the accused is able to meet the charge levelled against her. In the present case there are no allegations against the Petitioner for which she is answerable. In view thereof, I pass the following order :

¶19

megha Page No.2 of 3

¶20

3_wp_4848_2014.doc

¶21

a) Proceedings pending against the Petitioner in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pune Cantonment Court vide Regular Criminal Case No.136 of 2012 for the offences punishable under section 23, r/w. sections 3(3), 4(3), 5(1), 23, 25 and 26, of PC-PNDT Act, 1994 and rules 9(1), 9(4), 9(6), 9(8), 10(1-A), 13, 18(v) and 18(ix) of PC-PNDT Act, 1996 r/w. section 34 of the Indian Penal Code are quashed. Bail bond, if any, stands cancelled.

¶22

b) Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶23

(JUDGE)

¶24

megha Page No.3 of 3

Dr. Swati Abaso Gaikwad v. Dr. Vaishali Jadhav and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Swati Abaso Gaikwad v. Dr. Vaishali Jadhav and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sumitra @ Sangeeta Mahesh Razak Vs Rubina Asif Naik and Anr.

Sandeep Bushan Jain Vs Ajit Jamnadas Mehta and Anr.

Dr. Vijay Deepnarayan Pandey Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Rahul Guruprasad Mishra Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rajesh Darshanlal Bindra Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bharat Nivrutti Dhamdhere Vs Digambar Kamlapurkar and Anr.