The Delhi High Court has ruled that offences under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PCPNDT Act), are cognizable and non-bailable. This means the police are legally permitted to register First Information Reports (FIRs) and conduct investigations even though the Act requires court cognizance to be taken only upon a complaint filed by the appropriate authority.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, while addressing a writ petition filed by Dr. Randhawa Ultrasonography Imaging and Research Institute and its owners, clarified the legal position regarding the filing of FIRs under the PCPNDT Act.
Read Also:- Delhi High Court Denies Interim Bail to PFI Leader A.S. Ismail, Citing Improved Medical Condition In Jail
“Though Section 28 of PC & PNDT Act mandates that cognizance shall only be taken on a complaint, it does not restrict police from registering an FIR or conducting investigations,” the Court said.
The case involved an FIR lodged in 2017 against the institute and its doctors following an inspection by the District Magistrate (West) of Delhi, who claimed jurisdiction over the premises. The petitioners argued that the inspection, sealing of premises, and seizure of records were unlawful, citing lack of proper authority, absence of a seizure memo, and wrongful confiscation of CCTV footage.
"The act of sealing machines occurred on 21.12.2017, while the sealing order is dated 22.12.2017," the petitioners argued, claiming the inspection was driven by malice.
Read Also:- No Legal Immunity Under FEMA for IPC Crimes, Says Delhi High Court
Multiple alleged violations were recorded during inspection, including usage of an unapproved ultrasound machine, missing ultrasound reports, improper display of regulatory notices, and unauthorized running of an ultrasound training centre. The institute denied running a training centre under the rules of the PCPNDT Act and claimed it merely held workshops for registered medical professionals.
Despite objections, the Court observed that:
“From a harmonious reading of the PCPNDT Act and CrPC, offences under the Act being cognizable allows for FIR registration and police investigation.”
The petitioners also claimed that the West District Authority lacked jurisdiction, stating their area was reassigned to the South-West District Authority in 2016. However, the Court dismissed this, affirming that the West District had legal jurisdiction based on revenue records and that prior file transfer was an inadvertent administrative error.
Read Also:- Delhi High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail to Lawyer in Road Rage Case, Emphasizes Equality Before Law
The Court highlighted that:
“Merely because FIR or charge sheet has been filed does not nullify the complaint on which cognizance has been taken.”
In this case, the court confirmed that cognizance had not been taken on the FIR or charge sheet but on a formal complaint submitted by the District Appropriate Authority (DAA). Thus, the FIR and subsequent investigation were not barred by law.
The Court also emphasized that issues related to cancellation of registration and other allegations fall under separate mechanisms and must be addressed through due process and trial.
In conclusion, the writ petition seeking quashing of the FIR and related proceedings was dismissed. The judgment reinforces that legal action under the PCPNDT Act can include police investigation and FIR registration, as long as the final court proceedings follow the prescribed legal path.
Case Title: DR. RANDHAWA ULTRASONOGRAPHY IMAGING AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE & Ors v. STATE OF NCT, DELHI
