D.H.WAGHELA, J. By these References, learned single Judge has referred the following issues for consideration and opinion :

"(i) Whether under the provisions of Sec. 28 of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994, a Court can take cognizance of an offence under the Act on a complaint made by any officer authorised in this behalf by the appropriate authority?

(ii) Whether the provisions of the proviso to sub-sec. (3) of Sec. 4 of the P.N.D.T. Act require that the complaint should contain specific allegations regarding the contravention of the provisions of Secs. 5 and 6 of the Act?

(iii) Whether the burden lies on the authority to prove that there was contravention of the provisions of Sec. 5 or 6 of the P. N. D. T. Act?

(iv) Whether any deficiency of inaccuracy in filing Form-F as required under the statutory provisions is merely a procedural lapse?"

2. Above issues have come to be referred on account of the learned single Judge not agreeing with the following observations and conclusions expressed by another learned single Judge in Dr. Manish C. Dave v. State of Gujarat, 2008 (1) GLR 239 : 2008 (1) GLH 475 :

"10. .... Therefore, the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document