Allowed

M/S Dr. Randhawa Ultrasonography Imaging and Research Institute (through Its Authorized Representat v. State of Nct, Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC13 May 2024CRL.M.C./8941/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside orders dismissing the petitioner's application for release of a seized ultrasonography machine. The court directed the return of the machine upon the petitioner furnishing an affidavit undertaking to lease or sell it only to registered centers under the PC&PNDT Act and not to use it until registration is revived.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders set aside; machine to be released to petitioner upon filing an affidavit undertaking to sell/lease only to registered centers under the Act.

M/S Dr. Randhawa Ultrasonography Imaging and Research… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~6

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 8941/2023 & CRL.M.A. 34370/2023 M/S DR. RANDHAWA ULTRASONOGRAPHY IMAGING AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE (THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE) DR. J.S. RANDHAWA ..... Petitioner

¶4

Through: Mr. Percival Billimoria, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Khowaja Siddiqui, Ms. Nishtha Tyagi, Mr. Jay Singh and Mr. Tushar Bathija, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE OF NCT, DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, APP for State with SI Gaurav, PS. Hari Nagar.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

¶9

O R D E R % 13.05.2024

¶10

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 CrPC impugning the orders dated 26.02.2020 and 18.10.2023 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate.

¶11

The first order dated 26.02.2020 came to be passed on the application filed by the petitioner seeking release of Ultrasonography machine and DVR machine which were seized by the police in connection with FIR No.566/2017 under Sections 25/26/27 of The Pre-Conception & Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (in short ‘the Act’) registered at Police Station Hari Nagar against the petitioner.

¶12

The said application was dismissed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate vide aforesaid order dated 26.02.2020 on the ground that the

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 08:12:20

¶15

registration of the petitioner to use the Ultrasonography machine stood cancelled. Another ground which has been mentioned in the said order is that the petitioner’s institute was found running Ultrasonography Training Centre with live demo whereas the Registration Certificate given to the petitioner was to run Ultrasound Clinic for clinical practices.

¶16

Subsequently, another application under Section 457 CrPC was filed by the petitioner for release of Ultrasonography machine and DVR machine. The said application was also dismissed vide impugned order dated 18.10.2023. Insofar as the prayer for release of Ultrasonography machine is concerned, the same was rejected on the same ground that the license/registration of the petitioner was cancelled and such cancellation has not been revoked till date. As regards the DVR machine it was observed that the same cannot be directed to be released at that stage since as per the report of the IO, it was still required for the purpose of investigation.

¶17

The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Ultrasonography machine, in a sealed condition, is lying at the clinic of the petitioner since 06.12.2017 and the same is no more required for investigation purposes as recorded in the impugned order.

¶18

He invites the attention of the Court to the Status Report dated 23.09.2023 filed by the respondent before the learned Trial Court to contend that it has been recorded in the said Status Report that the equipment was sealed by PC & PNDT Cell and the machines are not required for further investigation.

¶19

He submits that the value of Ultrasonography machine is to the tune of Rs. 5 crores approximately and the said asset is getting wasted only for the reason that the same has been sealed. According to him, there is no

¶20

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 08:12:20

¶21

justification on the part of the respondents to withhold the said machine especially when the petitioner cannot use it nor has any intention to do so till the registration to use the same is revived. He submits that the petitioner is even prepared to give an affidavit to that effect.

¶22

The learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioner requires the said machine either to sell or lease the same out to authorised centre having the requisite registration under the PC & PNDT Act and/or to maintain it.

¶23

To buttress his contention, the learned Senior Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court in “Anant Ram Janta Hospital Barwala and Another vs. State of Haryana and Others; 2020 SCC OnLine P & H 1587.

¶24

The learned APP, on the other hand, has invited the attention of the Court to the Status Report to state that the PC & PNDT Cell has no objection to release the said machine provided the petitioner furnishes the details of the registered centre to whom the petitioner intends to sell or lease the Ultrasonography machine.

¶25

I have heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, as well as, the learned APP for the State and have perused the record.

¶26

In the present case petitioner’s title over the Ultrasonography machine is not in dispute, therefore, the entitlement of petitioner to receive the seized machine cannot be questioned.

¶27

A perusal of the Status Report dated 23.09.2023 filed by the State before the learned Trial Court shows that the Ultrasonography machine is not required by the PC & PNDT Cell for further investigation. This submission of the respondent is also recorded in the impugned order dated 26.02.2020.

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 08:12:20

¶30

The only apprehension expressed by the learned APP is that the petitioner may not use the machine again contrary to the provisions of the Act or may not sell or lease the same to any person who is not registered under the Act.

¶31

To allay the said apprehension, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, states that the petitioner shall file an affidavit in this Court stating that the Ultrasonography machine shall be sold or leased out only to the authorised centre having registration under the Act and the same will not be used by the petitioner till the time the cancellation of their license/registration is revoked.

¶32

At this stage, apt would it be to refer to the provisions of Section 3B of the Act, as well as Rule 3A(1) of the Pre-Conception & Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Rules, 1996 (in short ‘the Rules’), which reads as under:

¶33

“ Section 3B. Prohibition on sale of ultrasound machine, etc., to persons, laboratories, clinics, etc., not registered under the Act.— No person shall sell any ultrasound machine or imaging machine or scanner or any other equipment capable of detecting sex of the foetus to any Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic or any other person not registered under the Act.”

¶34

“ Rule 3A. Sale of ultrasound machines/imaging machines: (1) No organization including a commercial organization or a person, including manufacturer, importer, dealer or supplier of ultrasound machines/imaging machines or any other equipment, capable of detecting sex of foetus, shall sell, distribute, supply, rent, allow or authorize the use of any such machine or equipment in any manner, whether on payment or otherwise, to any Genetic Counsel- ling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic, Ultrasound Clinic, Imaging Centre or any other body or

¶35

¶36

person unless such Centre, Laboratory, Clinic, body or person is registered under the Act.”

¶37

A perusal of Section 3B of the Act and Rule 3A(1) of the Rules makes it evident that the Centre, Clinic or Laboratory, which is not registered under the Act, cannot be sold an Ultrasonography machine but there is no requirement under the Act that the person selling the said machine should also possess a registration certificate. Therefore, the petitioner will be under obligation to sell or lease the Ultrasonography machine to a Centre, Clinic or Laboratory which has the requisite registration under the Act. Further, since the petitioner’s registration under the Act has been cancelled, it cannot use Ultrasonography machine till the time such cancellation is revoked.

¶38

Therefore, keeping in view the above position and regard being had to the fact that the Ultrasonography machine is a valuable asset that is no more required for the investigation and the petitioner’s entitlement to claim the said machine is not in dispute, the impugned orders dated 26.02.2020 and 18.10.2023 are set aside and it is ordered as under:

¶39

i) within four days the petitioner shall file an affidavit in this Court undertaking that – a) the ultrasonography machine will be sold or leased out by it only to the Centre, Clinic or Laboratory which has registration under the Act; and b) the petitioner shall not use the Ultrasonography machine for detection of sex of foetus or selection of sex before or after conception till the time the cancellation of its registration under the Act, is revoked.

¶40

ii) within seven days from the date of this order, the respondent/PC & PNDT Cell is directed to de-seal the

¶41

¶42

ultrasonography machine and hand over the same to the petitioner.

¶43

iii) the petitioner shall send to the respondent/PC & PNDT Cell the details of the registered Centre, Clinic or Laboratory to which the petitioner sells or lease out ultrasonography machine, within two weeks from the date of such sale/lease.

¶44

iv) whenever the said ultrasonography machine is required to be produced during the trial, the same shall be produced by the petitioner.

¶45

The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶46

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J

¶47

MAY 13, 2024/dss

¶48

M/S Dr. Randhawa Ultrasonography Imaging and Research Institute (through Its Authorized Representat v. State of Nct, Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Dr. Randhawa Ultrasonography Imaging and Research Institute (through Its Authorized Representat v. State of Nct, Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunny Vs State of N.C.T of Delhi

Shashank Singh Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Mahipal Vs State(Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

Ishpreet Singh Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Priyanka Verma Vs State through SHO P.S. Krishna Nagar Shahdara

Monu Bhatnagar @ Saurabh Bhatnagar & Anr. Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.