Back
MANOJ MISRA, UJJAL BHUYAN
Naresh Kumar Garg – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
Here are the key points from the legal document:
JUDGMENT :
UJJAL BHUYAN, J.
Leave granted.
2. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.07.2024 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (briefly ‘the High Court’ hereinafter) in CRM-M No. 52858 of 2022 (Naresh Kumar Garg Vs. State of Haryana).
3. It may be mentioned that appellant as the petitioner had filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (briefly ‘the Cr.P.C.’ hereinafter) for quashing of the complaint bearing No. COMA/116/2018 dated 19.09.2018 filed under various provisions of the Pre- Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (briefly, ‘the PCPNDT Act’ hereinafter) as well as the summoning order dated 12.09.2022 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gurugram. However, vide the impugned judgment and order dated 24.07.2024, the High Court dismissed the aforesaid petition.
4. At the outset, a brief recital of the relevant facts would be in order.
5. It is stated that appellant is a qualified radiologist by profession.
5.1. On 17.09.2015, Chairman, District Appropriate Authority-cum-Civil Surgeon, Gurugram, Dr. Pushpa Bishnoi received a c
Ravinder Kumar VS State of Haryana - 2024 6 Supreme 727: No keywords or phrases indicating judicial treatment (e.g., followed, distinguished, criticized, questioned, overruled, reversed, abrogated) are present in the provided summary. The entry describes a holding on illegal search and abuse of process, with no evidence of subsequent treatment.
Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecological Societies of India (FOGSI) VS Union of India - 2019 6 Supreme 133: No keywords or phrases indicating judicial treatment are present. The entry states a holding on constitutional validity of specific provisions, providing no information on how the case has been treated by later decisions.
Radha Kishan VS State Of U. P. - 1962 0 Supreme(SC) 308: No keywords or phrases indicating judicial treatment are present. The entry outlines a prosecution burden under a specific Act, with no indicators of subsequent judicial treatment.
(1) Sex determination test – Summoning order – It is mandatory for person conducting Ultrasonography on a pregnant woman to keep complete record relating to Ultrasonography in clinic – Determination ....
Procedural safeguards must be strictly adhered to in actions taken under the PCPNDT Act as arbitrary actions undermine the statutory framework.
Sex Determination Test – Continuing prosecution based on an illegal search will amount to abuse of process of law – If law requires a particular thing to be done in a particular manner, same shall be....
Important Points – (1) Court cannot conduct mini trial at the time of framing charge.(2) Doing prohibited sex determination test – Examining women patient through ultrasound procedure and not maintai....
The court upheld the prima facie evidence against one petitioner under the PCPNDT Act while dismissing the complaint against the other due to lack of incriminating evidence.
The court affirmed that complaints under the PC & PNDT Act must be filed by designated authorities and that sufficient grounds are required for trial without conducting a full evidentiary examination....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
