Petition seeking quashing of an FIR under the PNDT Act alleging illegal sex determination detected through a decoy patient. The court rejected all grounds: police may investigate PNDT offences, the Fatehabad team's involvement was not barred for want of territorial jurisdiction, and the FIR was validly lodged.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.04.2022
Dr. Anant Ram
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Present: Mr. Abhishek Sethi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, DAG, Haryana assisted by SI Surinder.
(proceedings conducted through video conferencing)
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 2 )
CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
constituted a three member team on 12.7.2021 comprising of the following
members :-
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 3 ) CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
Tohana where two persons came on a motorcycle. One of them whose name was Jagraj sat in the car. Deepak as well as the decoy pregnant female were made to sit on the rear seat. Another lady namely Jaswinder Kaur also came and sat in the car. On the asking of Jaswinder Kaur, the decoy pregnant female handed over an amount of Rs.20,000/- in cash which had been given to her by the team. Jagraj drove the car to Barwala (Hisar). One of the team members namely Dr. Girish Kumar intimated Dr. Ratna Bharti, Civil Surgeon, Hisar through Dr. Viresh Bhushan, Civil Surgeon, Fatehabad that their team as well as the decoy pregnant female were proceeding towards Barwala (Hisar) and asked them to keep their PNDT team ready so that they may also reach the place of occurrence immediately. Consequently, a team comprising of the following doctors/ officials of Hisar was constituted:-
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 4 ) CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
person sitting in the room and was informed that she was carrying a male fetus. Thereafter, the decoy pregnant female was asked to lie down on a bench. The person present there conducted ultrasound examination of her abdomen and disclosed that she was carrying a fetus of five and a half months and the same was upside down and that the same was a male fetus. When they came out of the room, Jaswinder Kaur disclosed the name of the person who had conducted the test as Dr. Anant Ram. Jaswinder Kaur brought both the females back to Barwala (Hisar) on foot where Jagraj was waiting. He drove all three of them namely Jaswinder Kaur, decoy pregnant female and the other lady towards Bus Stand, Barwala. When the car stopped at the Bus Stand, the decoy pregnant female signalled to the raiding team and the team members apprehended Jagraj and Jaswinder Kaur with the help of a police team. Dr. Girish Kumar requested the Hisar team to reach Barwala immediately. The team took Jagraj and Jaswinder Kaur to the place where sex determination test had been conducted and a raid was conducted. Dr. Anant Ram as well as the owner of the house namely Smt. Sunita had already fled from the place. Upon search of Jaswinder Kaur, 80 currency notes of the denomination of Rs.500/- were recovered out of which 40 currency notes were the ones passed on by decoy pregnant female whose serial numbers had been noted down previously by the raiding team of Fatehabad. The remaining 40 currency notes were stated to have been given to Jaswinder Kaur by the second pregnant lady namely Smt. Manisha. At that time, the Hisar team also reached the place of occurrence. Jaswinder Kaur, upon being quizzed, stated that she had taken both the ladies alongwith Jagraj to Dr. Anant Ram in the house of Sunita for the purpose of
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 5 ) CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
getting the sex determination test conducted. Jagraj, in his statement, also admitted that the deal had been struck for Rs.40,000/- out of which he had received Rs.20,000/- in his account through ‘Google Pay’ . A DVR in respect of CCTV cameras installed in the premises, was taken into possession. An ultrasound machine - make ‘SURBI’ alongwith a probe, a Dell laptop charger, a SURBI ultrasound machine charger, attachment cable etc. were also recovered from the spot. Statement of one Hawa Singh of locality was recorded, who stated that the house in question belongs to Sunita.
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 6 )
CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 7 )
CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
The learned counsel vehemently argued that since no amount out of the settled amount of Rs.40,000/- was admittedly ever paid to Dr. Anant Ram or was ever recovered from him, therefore, his involvement in the alleged sex determination test is absolutely ruled out. This Court does find that while the initial payment of Rs.20,000/-, had been made to Jagraj Singh by the decoy pregnant female through ‘Google Pay’ and the balance amount of Rs.20,000/- had been paid by the decoy pregnant female to Jaswinder Kaur, which was duly recovered from her but the prosecution version as unfolded in the FIR itself clearly shows that on the day when the decoy pregnant female was being taken by Jaswinder Kaur and Jagraj Singh to Barwala for
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 8 ) CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
the test, they picked up another lady on the way in the car and her test was also conducted by the petitioner alongwith the test conducted upon the decoy pregnant female. Since no amount in respect of the test conducted on the second lady was recovered from Jagraj Singh or Jaswinder Kaur, it appears that either the amount paid by the second lady must have been retained in entiriety by the petitioner Dr. Anant Ram or there might have been some other adjustments amongst petitioner Dr. Anant Ram and coaccused. There is sufficient evidence indicating the complicity of Dr. Anant Ram, who is not only seen in the CCTV footage but some equipment used for illegal sex determination test was also recovered from the spot. Further, Jaswinder Kaur and Jagraj Singh upon their arrest had also made disclosure statements about the tests having been conducted by the petitioner. The above raised contention on behalf of the petitioner, as such, does not carry any weight and cannot be accepted.
10. Submission No. (ii)
It is no doubt correct that the petitioner was not arrested at the spot. However, his presence is duly reflected in CCTV footage collected from the cameras/DVR installed near the place of occurrence. The co-accused Jaswinder Kaur and Jagraj Singh in their disclosure statements have also nominated the petitioner as the person who had conducted the illegal sex determination test. A portable ultrasound machine, make ‘SURBI’ alongwith probe, a Dell laptop charger and other equipment were recovered from the spot. It will not be out of place to mention that the ultrasound equipment
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 9 ) CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
which had been purchased and registered in the name of the petitioner, already stands seized by the police in connection with other cases registered against him. The recovered equipment is in the nature of a portable ultrasound machine, which apparently had been acquired by the petitioner without getting the same registered in his own name. The evidence collected by the police is sufficient to establish the involvement of the petitioner. The contention, as such, stands negated
11. Submission No. (iii)
The learned counsel has raised issues regarding territorial jurisdiction of the team appointed by Civil Surgeon, Fatehabad, particularly as regards the initial proceedings conducted in the present case i.e. nominating the decoy pregnant female, handing over the currency notes, whose serial numbers had been noted down etc. However, in the present case, the facts are such where it can be said that the occurrence had partly taken place in Fatehabad where the accused conspired for committing the offences inasmuch as a deal was struck for getting the illegal sex determination test conducted and pursuant threto an amount of Rs. 20,000/- was transferred to accused Jagraj Singh through ‘Google Pay’ . It was from Fatehabad that the accused Jagraj Singh and Jaswinder Kaur proceeded alongwith decoy pregnant female towards Barwala (Hisar), in pursuance of their conspiracy. When the team constituted by Civil Surgeon, Fatehabad, which was tailing the car in which the decoy pregnant female was being taken by co-accused, realised that the
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 10 ) CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
car was proceeding towards District Hisar, Dr. Girish Kumar, a member of the team constituted by Civil Surgeon, Fatehabad immediately intimated Dr. Ratna Bharti, Civil Surgeon, Hisar through Dr. Viresh Bhushan, Civil Surgeon, Fatehabad requesting them to send their team as well and consequently the team constituted by Civil Surgeon, Hisar did actually join the proceedings though after the test had been conducted. In these circumstances, the association of the team constituted by Civil Surgeon, Fatehabad cannot be said to be not having any jurisdiction, particularly when the commission of the offences can be said to have commenced from Fatehabad where a conspiracy was hatched, though, the offences culminated in Hisar where test was performed. As such, the part of the proceedings conducted by the team constituted by Civil Surgeon, Fatehabad in respect of the FIR registered at Hisar cannot be called to question on grounds of territorial jurisdiction.
In the present case, the FIR in question has been lodged at the instance of Dr. Prabhu Dayal, Nodal Officer, PNDT, Civil Hospital, Hisar. The contention of the petitioner that it is only the Appropriate Authority, Hisar which is competent to lodge FIR cannot be accepted inasmuch as the police, in terms of Section 154 Cr.P.C., upon receiving information pertaining to commission of a cognizable offence is bound to reduce the same in writing which is called a First Information Report. The bar as envisaged in Section 28 of the PNDT Act is a bar against taking cognizance by the Court wherein
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 11 ) CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
it is provided that it is only upon a complaint made by Appropriate Authority that a Court may take cognizance of an offence. The said bar cannot be extended to the proceedings pertaining to lodging of FIR, as any person can give information pertaining to commission of a cognizable offence to police. In the present case, the FIR having been lodged at the instance of Dr. Prabhu Dayal, Nodal Officer, PNDT, Civil Hospital, Hisar, who was incharge of the team constituted by Civil Surgeon, Hisar, vide order dated 13.7.2021 (Annexure R-1) can not be said to have been lodged by a person not competent to do so. The aforesaid submission is found to be sans merit and does not merit acceptance.
13. Submission No. (v)
The learned counsel in order to hammer forth his aforesaid submission has placed reliance upon a judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in 1962 AIR (SC) 63 - Delhi Administration versus Ram Singh and contended that the said judgment was delivered while interpreting provisions of Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956, which has provisions in Sections 13 and 14 parimateria with provisions of Sections 17, 17A and 30 of the PNDT Act. He has submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court held that it is only the ‘special police officer’ who is competent to investigate the case and no other police officer. It has been submitted that
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 12 ) CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
since even in the PNDT Act, the Appropriate Authority has been vested with all the powers, as could be exercised by a police officer including power to initiate investigation, and association of police is not visualized, therefore, the investigation conducted in the present case wherein police has also been associated, is null and void and the entire proceedings including lodging of FIR deserve to be set aside.
Sections 13 of the Suppression of Sections 48 of the PMLA Sections 17(3) of the PNDT Immoral Traffic in Women and Act Act Girls Act, 1956 13. (1) There shall be for each area to be 48. Authorities under the Act. - 17. Appropriate Authority and specified by the State Government in this There shall be the following Advisory Committee - behalf, a special police officer appointed classes of authorities for the (1) x x x by or on behalf of that Government for purposes of this Act, namely: (2) x x x dealing with offences under this Act in that area. (a) Director or Additional (3) The officers appointed as Director or Joint Director , Appropriate Authorities under sub(2) The special police officer shall not be below the rank of(b) Deputy Director, setion (1) or sub-section (2) shall be,— (a) an Assistant Commissioner of (c) Assistant Director , and Police in the presidency towns of (d) such other class of officers (a) when appointed for the whole Madras and Calcutta; as may be appointed for the of the State or the Union territory, (b) a Superintendent of Police in the purposes of this Act consisting of the following three members:—
(2) The special police officer shall not be below the rank of(a) an Assistant Commissioner of Police in the presidency towns of Madras and Calcutta; (b) a Superintendent of Police in the presidency town of Bombay; and (c) a Deputy Superintendent of
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
| Police else where. (3) For the efficient discharge of his functions in relation to offences under this Act- (a) the special police officer of an area shall be assisted by such number |
( 13 ) CR |
M-M-36146-2021 (O&M) (i) an officer of or above the rank of theJoint Director of Health and Family Welfare— Chairperson; (ii) an eminent woman representing women’s organisation; and |
|---|---|---|
| of subordinate police officers (including women police officers wherever practicable) as the State Government may think fit; and (b) x x x |
(iii) an officer of Law Department of the State or the Union territory concerned: Provided that .... ..... |
|
| Sections 14 of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956 |
Sections 19 and 45 of the PMLA Act |
Sections 17(4) and 30 of the PNDT Act |
| 14.Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure' 1898 (5 of 1898) any offence punishable under this Act shall be deemed to bea cognizable offencewithin the meaning of that Code: Provided that, notwithstanding anything contained in that Code,- |
19. Power to arrest.—(1) If the Director, Deputy Director, Assistant Director or any other officer authorised in this behalf by the Central Government by general or special order, has on the basis of material in his possession, reason to believe (the reason for such belief to be |
**17.**Appropriate Authority and Advisory Committee-- (1) xxx (2) xxx (3) xxx (4) The Appropriate Authority shall have the following functions, namely:- |
| (i) arrest without warrant may be made only by the special police officer or under his direction or guidance, or subject to his prior approval ; (ii) x x x (iii) x x x |
recorded in writing) that any person has been guilty of an offence punishable under this Act,he may arrest such person and shall, as soon as may be, inform him of the grounds for such arrest. (2) x x x (3) x x x 45.Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable.— (1) xxxx xxxx xxxx (1A)Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), or any other provision of this Act, no police officer shall investigate into an offence under this Act unless specifically authorised, by the Central Government by a general or special order, and, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed. (2) xxxx xxxx xxxx |
(a) (b) (c)to investigate complaints of breach of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder and take immediate action; and (d) xxx (e) to take appropriate legal action against the use of any sex selection technique by any person at any place,_suo motu_or brough to its notice and alsoto initiate independent investigations in such matter; **30.**Power to search and seize records, etc. - 1.If the Appropriate Authority has reason to believe that an offence under this Act has been or is being committed at any Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory or Genetic Clinic or any other place,such Authority or any officer authorisedthereof in this behalf may, subject to such rules as may be prescribed,enter and searchat all reasonable times .... ..... .... |
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 14 )
CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
under:
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 15 ) CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
Hon’ble Supreme Court, in 1962 AIR SC 63, Delhi Administration vs. Ram Singh , while interpreting the provisions of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956, held as follows:
(emphasis provided)
Thus, from the scheme of the Act, it is evident that there is some kind of exclusivity in the matter of arrest and investigation and and it is only the 'special police officers' who have been made competent to arrest and investigate ruling out involvement of police officers who are not nominated as 'special police officers'.
(iii) Now, in order to determine as to whether there is any such kind of exclusivity in the matter of investigation under the PNDT Act, the provisions of the Act and also the rules framed thereunder need to be examined. A perusal of Sections 17 and and 30 of the PNDT Act does show that Appropriate Authority has been conferred with various powers in the matter of investigation. Though it is nowhere specifically stated therein as to whether the same would also include power of arrest but the word “investigation” as defined in section 2(h) of Cr.P.C. has been interpreted to be wide enough so as to include arrest as well. Hon'ble Supreme Court, in 2003(2) M.C. Abraham vs. State of Maharashtra held as under:
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 16 )
CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
“In the first place, arrest of an accused is a part of the investigation and is within the discretion of the investigating officer. Section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides for arrest by a police officer without an order from a Magistrate and without a warrant. The Section gives discretion to the police officer who may, without an order from a Magistrate and even without a warrant, arrest any person in the situations enumerated in that section. It is open to him, in the course of investigation, to arrest any person who has been concerned with any congnizable offence or against whom reasonable complaint has been made or credible information has been received, or a reasonable suspicion exists of his having been so concerned.”
However, there is no such provision in the PNDT Act to absolutely rule out involvement of the police or to have restricted involvement, as has been noticed in the other two Acts, referred to above. The offences under the PNDT Act have been classified as 'cognizable' offences without there being any exclusion clause ruling out police investigation as is there under provisions of section 45(1A) of PMLA and without there being any kind of rider defining a partcular class of police officers only to be competent as is noticed in proviso to Section 14(i) of Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956. Thus, in the absence of any exclusion clause or imposition of any limitation as regards the class of officers who have been made competent, the local police can not be said to be not competent to investigate cognizable offences under PNDT Act. Still further, Rule 18(A) of the Pre-conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Rules, 1996 tends to point out that involvement of the police is not absolutely ruled out though,
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 17 ) CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
police normally is not expected to be associated. Rule 18-A (3) of
the said Rules reads as follows :-
The words 'as far as possible' as existing in aforesaid rule would show that association of police is not absolutely ruled out though to be avoided 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.
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 18 )
CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
“28. Cognizance of offences –
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 19 )
CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
PNDT Act. The judgement was delivered while considering the following issues which had been referred to a larger Bench by a Single Bench of this Court:-
“In the circumstances, the questions as formulated in the reference are answered in the following manner, that:-
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 20 )
CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 21 ) CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
22. Submission No. (vi)
There is no dispute that in terms of Section 28 of the PNDT Act, it is only upon a complaint made by Appropriate Authority that a Court can take cognizance and not on the basis of a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., as far as offences under PNDT Act are concerned. As has been specifically stated in the reply filed by the State that a Kalandra is going to be filed by the Appropriate Authority in respect of offences under Sections 23, 3(1), 3(a), 4, 5(ii) and 6(b) of the PNDT Act, whereas the police has separately filed a chargesheet under 173 Cr.P.C. in respect of the offences under IPC only. As such, it cannot be said that there has been any violation of Section 28 of the PNDT Act.
23. Submission No. (vii)
(vii)that as per Rule 18A(3)(iv) of The Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Rules 1996, framed in exercise of the powers conferred by section 32 of the Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act 1994, the Appropriate Authority is not supposed to associate police for investigating case under PNDT Act.
As already noticed above, while discussing submission no.(v), there is no absolute bar under PNDT Act against the police investigating a case, as evident from Rule 18-A(3)(iv) of the Pre-conception and Pre-Natal
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 22 )
CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Rules, 1996. The said Rule reads as follows :-
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
( 23 ) CRM-M-36146-2021 (O&M)
notice of police, the officials of Department of Health and Family Welfare should be informed immediately. As such, Rule 18A(3)(iv) cannot be made a ground for quashing of the FIR, particularly when no such absolute bar is provided in the PNDT Act, unlike the provisions of PMLA Act wherein a specific bar is envisaged in provisions of Section 45(1A) of the PMLA Act. The aforesaid submission being sans merit cannot be accepted.
02.04.2022 (Gurvinder Singh Gill) kamal Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No
KAMAL KUMAR 2022.04.04 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR and consequential proceedings under the PNDT Act are liable to be quashed for want of territorial jurisdiction of the team constituted by the Civil Surgeon, Fatehabad?
Whether a police officer can investigate a cognizable offence under the PNDT Act, or is investigation solely the domain of the Appropriate Authority?
Whether the FIR was lodged by a competent officer and whether cognizance could be taken on a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C.?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Delhi Administration v. Ram SinghDistinguished¶100
1962 AIR (SC) 63 - Delhi Administration versus Ram Singh · Who else cites this
Hardeep Singh v. State of HaryanaFollowed¶131
Criminal Misc. No. M-4211 of 2021 – Hardeep Singh and another Versus State of Haryana and another
Dr. Amritlal Rohledar v. State of ChhattisgarhDisapproved¶147
2021(1) C.G.L.J. 13 - Dr. Amritlal Rohledar Versus State of Chhattisgarh and others
Dr. Aparna Singhal v. State of HaryanaReferred¶148
Criminal Misc. No. M-421 of 2021 – Dr. Aparna Singhal versus State of Haryana and another
M.C. Abraham v. State of MaharashtraRelied on¶104
2003(2) M.C. Abraham vs. State of Maharashtra
9 provisions across 5 enactments
Dr. Anant Ram
State of Haryana
Gurvinder Singh Gill
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
