SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(P&H) 833

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Manjari Nehru Kaul, J.
Virender Singh - Petitioner - Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana - Respondent - Respondent
CRM-M-46808 of 2018
Decided On : 19-10-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Ramesh Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Mayuri Lakhanpal Kalia, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana.

The central legal point established in the judgment is that an accused cannot be held guilty based on assumptions and presumptions, and the legality of possession of medical instruments and kits should be determined based on the qualifications and authorized practices of the accused.

Headnote:

MTP Act - Medical Termination of Pregnancy - 3, 4 - The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 - The court discussed the provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, and their application in the case. It emphasized that the seized surgical instruments are commonly used for various medical procedures, including childbirth, and the petitioner, being a qualified GAMS doctor, was authorized to practice Indian System of Medicine and Modern Medicine, including surgery, gynecology, and obstetrics.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a qualified GAMS doctor, was accused of conducting illegal termination of pregnancies based on the recovery of surgical instruments and MTP Kits from his Nursing Home during a raid conducted by a team of doctors.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the allegations in the FIR did not establish the offence alleged against the petitioner. It noted that the petitioner was not present during the raid, and the seized instruments were commonly used for various medical procedures, including childbirth. The court also emphasized that the petitioner, being a qualified GAMS doctor, was authorized to practice Indian System of Medicine and Modern Medicine, including surgery, gynecology, and obstetrics.

Issues: The issues revolved around the legality of the petitioner's possession of surgical instruments and MTP Kits, and whether the petitioner had violated the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the seized instruments were not exclusively used for the termination of pregnancy and that the petitioner, as a qualified GAMS doctor, was authorized to practice Indian System of Medicine and Modern Medicine, including surgery, gynecology, and obstetrics. It emphasized that the petitioner could not be held guilty based on assumptions and presumptions.

Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the FIR and all consequential proceedings arising from it were quashed qua the petitioner.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J.

The petitioner has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.60 dated 04.02.2016 under Sections 3, 4 of The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to reproduce the contents of the FIR, which has been annexed as Annexure P-1:-

    “To, SHO Jhajjar, Sub. MTP Act Sub.: For registration of the FIR against sh. Varinder Singh, Prop. Dhankhar Nursing Home, Near Bus Stand Jhajjar under MTP Act. Today, on 04.02.2016 at about 12:30PM, on the written order of Civil Surgeon Jhajjar, a team consisting Dr. Ishwar Singh, Civil Surgeon Jhajjar, Dr. Rakesh, Deputy Civil Surgeon Jhajjar, Dr. Raj Karan, Deputy Civil Surgeon Jhajjar. Dr. Vaneet, Deputy Civil Surgeon NHM, Dr. Ruchika (LMO), Dr. M. Kamal, District Ayurvedic Officer and Vijay Raje, District Drug Controller Officer of Health Department went to the abovementioned Dhankhar Nursing Home, near bus stand Jhajjar to enquire for conducting illegal MTP. During enquiry, the team got certain instruments and MTP Tablets which are used for abortion MTP, the list is enclosed at page no. 1 & 2. The above mentioned medicine and instruments were sealed after wrapping in a white cloth and the seal is stamp VRR and one sample seal was also prepared. Thus, the above mentioned doctor was involved in conducting the abortion and therefore, the case may be registered under Section 3 & 4 of MTP Act, 1971 against the doctor and further action be taken. Encls. List is at page no. 1 & 2 seizure duly sealed & signed by team members, Rakesh DY C.S. Jhajjar. Police Proceedings:- Today I ASI was present alongwith C Ravinder 743, on the Shikara Chowk in relation to patrol duty then Rakesh, Dy. Civil Surgeon Jhajjar met me and gave an application alongwith the sealed sample having the instruments and tablets. Perusal of the complaint, made out an offence U/S 3 - 4 MTP Act, 1971 thereafter, the writing is sent to the police station for registration of the FIR through C Ravinder 743 who will inform the FIR number after registration of the same. I ASI, am going to the spot of occurrence Dhankhar Hospital alongwith Dr. Rakesh, Dy. Civil Surgeon. At Chichara Chowk Jhajjar. Sd/- Pankaj Kumar ASI PP City Jhajjar dated 04.02.2016.”

    3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has, inter alia, contended that he is a qualified GAMS doctor; that during the raid, neither the petitioner was present nor any medical termination of pregnancy was being carried out in his Nursing Home. Furthermore, he was also permitted to carry out medical procedures including carrying out delivery of pregnant women. It has been further argued that, even as per the affidavit filed by the Civil Surgeon, Jhajjar, Misoprostol tablet which was allegedly recovered from his Nursing home, is often used for treatment in maternity homes and for postpartum bleeding, during delivery. In support, learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to Annexure P-4. Learned counsel has still further submitted that even if the entire allegations levelled in the FIR were presumed to be true, no offence would still be made out against the petitioner as mere purchase of MTP kits, which were allegedly found in the Nursing home of the petitioner, would not be an offence under the Act. Learned counsel in support of his submissions has placed reliance upon CRM-M No.32212 of 2011 titled as Dr. Renu Bansal Versus State of Haryana, CRM-M No.15860 of 2014 titled as Dr. Vandana Malik Versus State of Haryana.

    4. Per contra, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite, has asserted that a raiding party comprising of the Civil Surgeon, Jhajjar and other senior officials and doctors recovered surgical instruments and MTP Kits from Dhankar Hospital, Jhajjar (being run by t

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top