Supreme Court Disposes Of 2006 PIL Seeking Better Implementation Of PC&PNDT Act, Grants Liberty To File Fresh Petition

The Supreme Court has disposed of a nearly two-decade-old public interest litigation (PIL) seeking stronger implementation of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PC&PNDT Act).

The Court observed that several amendments had been introduced to the Act and its Rules during the pendency of the petition. It therefore considered it appropriate to dispose of the existing proceedings while allowing interested parties to approach the Court again with fresh concerns regarding the implementation of the legislation.

Background

The petition, filed in 2006 by the Voluntary Health Association of Punjab, sought a series of directions to improve enforcement of the PC&PNDT Act, which regulates the use of pre-natal diagnostic techniques and prohibits sex selection.

The petitioner had raised several concerns, including the functioning of Appropriate Authorities (AAs), monitoring of ultrasound clinics, maintenance of statutory records and accountability of officials responsible for enforcing the law.

It also sought stronger inspection mechanisms, specialised legal officers, special courts for cases under the Act and regular monitoring of child sex ratios. Among other requests, the petition proposed changes to the composition of advisory committees and stricter oversight of ultrasound machines.

A bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna, Justice R. Mahadevan and Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya noted that the proceedings had remained pending for approximately two decades.

The Court specifically took note of legislative and regulatory changes introduced during this period, observing:

"During the pendency of this Writ Petition before this Court several amendments have been made to the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition on Sex-Selection) Act, 1994 (for short “PC & PNDT Act”) and the Rules."

Considering these developments, the bench held that the appropriate course was to dispose of the existing petition rather than continue proceedings based on the original set of reliefs.

The Supreme Court disposed of the writ petition while preserving the right of the petitioner association or any other interested party to approach the Court through fresh proceedings.

The bench clarified:

"In the circumstances, we find that the better course of action would be to dispose of this Writ Petition with liberty to the petitioner or any other party who is interested in implementation of the said Act to file a fresh Writ Petition raising the issues with regard to the non-implementation of the Act as well as other incidental and ancillary issues."

The Court accordingly disposed of the petition and directed that any pending applications, if applicable, would also stand disposed of.

Case Details

Case Title: Voluntary Health Association of Punjab v. Union of India & Others

Case Number: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 349 of 2006

Judges: Justice B.V. Nagarathna, Justice R. Mahadevan and Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya

Decision Date: October 29, 2026