Back
2019 Supreme(Ori) 115
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
S.K. Sahoo, J.
Satyabrata Patel - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Orissa - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 2419 of 2017
Decided On : 29-07-2019
B.K. Ragada, Adv., L.N. Patel, Adv., N. Kdas, Adv., U.C. Dora, Adv., H.K. Muduli, Adv., Prem Kumar Patnaik, Adv.
The relevant date for considering the period of limitation is the date of filing the complaint petition, and a prima facie case under the PCPNDT Act can lead to the court taking cognizance of the offences.
Headnote:
PCPNDT Act - Challenge to Cognizance - Sections 23, 25 - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the order taking cognizance of offences under sections 23 and 25 of the PCPNDT Act, related to conducting ultrasound tests in an unregistered clinic and using an unregistered ultrasound machine.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the complaint petition was filed within the prescribed period of limitation and that a prima facie case under sections 23 and 25 of the PCPNDT Act was made out.
Issues: The issues included the period of limitation for taking cognizance and the legality of conducting ultrasound tests in an unregistered clinic.
Ratio Decidendi: The relevant date for considering the period of limitation is the date of filing the complaint petition, and a prima facie case under the PCPNDT Act can lead to the court taking cognizance of the offences.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the challenge to the order taking cognizance and directed the trial court to proceed with the case, emphasizing the need to conclude the trial within six months.
JUDGMENT :
S.K. Sahoo J.
The petitioner Satyabrata Patel has filed this application under section 482 of Cr.P.C. challenging the impugned order dated 05.08.2017 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Jharsuguda in 2(C) CC No. 1630 of 2012 in taking cognizance of the offences under sections 23 and 25 of the Preconception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act,1994 (in short, "PCPNDT Act") and issuance of process against him.
2. The complaint petition was filed by the DTO-cum-Authorised Officer of the District Appropriate Authority, Jharsuguda under the PCPNDT Act against the petitioner and others wherein it is stated that the State PC & PNDT monitoring team visited Jharsuguda on 22.08.2012 for a surprise inspection and met the Collector-cum- District Appropriate Authority, Jharsuguda and appraised the latter regarding one unregistered ultrasound clinic run by the petitioner. The Collector-cum-District Appropriate Authority authorized Dr.Hrushikesh Naik, the DTO vide order No.324 dated 22.08.2012 to inspect the ultrasound clinic along with the State team. The State team proceeded to the Doctors Chamber, Jyoti Medical Store near Hotel Gourav, Main Road, Behermal, Jharsuguda at about 1.30 p.m. During such inspection, the team found 2-3 patients were present in the ultrasound clinic and waiting for the ultrasound test and the petitioner was conducting ultrasound test of one patient namely, Debanda Patel, S/o. Late Laxman Patel, At/P.O.Jhirpali, P.S.Likera, District- Jharsuguda. It is stated in the complaint petition that the ultrasound clinic was run by the petitioner without registration and he unauthorisedly purchased the portable ultrasound machine bearing model No.DP-6600, Serial No.BE-75-5898 from Greaves Systems, P-597, Hemanta Mukhopadhaya Sarani (Keyatola Road),3rd floor, Kolkata-700 029. During course of inspection, the petitioner himself admitted that the ultrasound clinic in the name and style of "Doctors Chamber" is not registered under the PCPNDT Act and he is not a trained person as per PCPNDT Rules,1996 and that the clinic was not maintaining the mandatory records as per the said Act and that he had purchased the said un-registered ultrasound machine since 28.05.2007. During inspection, the statement of the petitioner was recorded in presence of the inspection team, the C.D.M.O. and other witnesses. It is also stated in the complaint petition that the petitioner is a Government doctor being posted as Medical Officer, O.S.A.P. Hospital, Jharsuguda and unauthorisedly he was conducting ultrasound test of the pregnant women involving sex selection practices in the said chamber by using the unregistered portable ultrasound machine and also doing infertility cases in the said clinic. It is also stated that the petitioner was not a qualified person to perform the ultrasound test as per Rule 3(3)(1)(b) of the PCPNDT Rules,1996. It is also stated that the manufacturer of the said ultrasound machine MINDRAY knowing the provisions of the said Act, unauthorisedly sold the ultrasound machine to the petitioner through the dealer, Greaves Systems P-597, Hemanta Mukhopadhaya Sarani (Keyatola Road),3rd Floor, Kolkata-700 029 violating the prevision of section 3-B of the PCPNDT Act and Rule 3-A of the PCPNDT Rules. The authorized signatory, namely, Debasish Chothria for Greaves Systems is also responsible along with MINDRAY ultrasound manufacturer for violation of the provisions of the PCPNDT Act and PCPNDT Rules. During course of inspection, the following articles of the said clinic were seized:
(i) One portable ultrasound machine bearing model DP6600, Serial No.BE-75-5898.
(ii) Report on abdomen and pelvic sonography of the clinic 54 nos.
(iii) Ultrasound scan report- two numbers.
(iv) Xerox scan report- 3 nos.
(v) Prescription pad of Dr.Satyabrata Patel
(vi) Invoice of portable ultrasound machine bearing model DP-6600, Serial No.BE-75-5898 in favour of Dr.Satyabrata Patel.
(vii) Xerox copy of certificates and other s
