PCPNDT Act: Can Seized Sonography Machines Be Released on Supurdagi?

In India, the battle against female feticide and sex-selective abortions is fiercely fought through the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PCPNDT Act). Sonography machines, often central to violations of this law, are frequently seized during raids on unregistered or non-compliant centers. A pressing question for clinic owners and medical practitioners arises: Sonography Machine Seized under PCPNDT Act should be Released on Supurdagi or Not?

This blog delves into the legal nuances, judicial precedents, and practical considerations surrounding the release of such equipment on supurdagi (custody on bond or security). While this provides general insights based on case law, it is not a substitute for professional legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for case-specific guidance.

The Purpose and Strict Framework of the PCPNDT Act

The PCPNDT Act regulates prenatal diagnostic techniques to curb sex determination and female foeticide. It mandates registration of centers, proper record-keeping (like Form F), and prohibits misuse of ultrasound machines. Violations trigger seizures under Section 30, with equipment often liable to confiscation under Section 25. 2018 2 Supreme 611 2021 1 Supreme 541

Courts emphasize strict compliance, dismissing claims of 'clerical errors' in records. As noted in one ruling, Strict compliance with the PCPNDT Act's provisions is essential to prevent sex-selective practices, and allegations of non-compliance cannot be dismissed as mere clerical errors. 2023 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 1787

Seizure typically follows inspections revealing issues like incomplete Form F, unregistered machines, or absent qualified staff. For instance, Rule 12 of the 1996 Rules allows the Appropriate Authority to seal and seize machines if violations are found. 2023 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 1787

Seizure Procedures and Common Violations

During raids, authorities seize machines, records (Form F, MTP registers), and issue show-cause notices. Examples from cases include:- Sealing machines for non-communication of faults within 30 days or incomplete forms. 2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 362- Inspections by authorized personnel like Civil Surgeons, who may delegate surgeons post-amendment. 2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 362

One case highlighted: Respondent No.2 seized Sonography machine and issued show-cause notice to the applicant... Sonography machine of applicant was having fault and it was not working for two days. Yet, the court upheld proceedings, stressing evidence-dependent discharge. 2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 362

Illegal seizures occur if procedures like immediate Magistrate intimation under Rule 12 are ignored: The seizure and sealing of the sonography machine is therefore stated to be an illegal and unsustainable act. 2015 0 Supreme(Bom) 391

Judicial Stance on Release on Supurdagi

General Presumption Against Release

The law leans against releasing seized sonography machines on supurdagi until proceedings conclude. Courts hold that premature release could enable repeat violations, undermining the Act's goal. The ultrasound sonography machine shall not be released by the Courts until the conclusion of the proceedings under the PCPNDT Act. 2015 0 Supreme(Raj) 286

In a key precedent, equipment liable to confiscation should not be released until the culmination of all proceedings. Release requires exceptional reasons and minimum security like a bank guarantee. 2017 4 Supreme 511

Similarly, vehicles and equipment involved in offences under the Act should not be released during the pendency of proceedings, except under exceptional circumstances. 2017 4 Supreme 511

Insights from High Court Rulings

High Courts reinforce this. In one matter, a sealed machine post-raid was not released lightly, with courts noting future compliance undertakings.

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA vs DR DEELIP PRABHAKAR KHARWADKAR

Another emphasized non-release of properties liable to confiscation, drawing parallels: Thus, the vehicles or any properties seized... cannot be released on ‘supurdagi’ under the provisions of the Cr.P.C. The object of the mining laws will be defeated... Adapted to PCPNDT, this protects enforcement. 2018 0 Supreme(Raj) 420

The Supreme Court and High Courts stress retention to prevent misuse: releasing seized equipment without proper safeguards could send a wrong message and weaken enforcement efforts. 2021 1 Supreme 541

When Might Release on Supurdagi Be Considered?

Exceptions are narrow and require:- Genuine hardship demonstrated by the owner.- Advanced proceedings stage.- Adequate security, e.g., bank guarantee.- Equipment essential for non-violative treatments. 2017 4 Supreme 511

Courts may direct release if conviction is suspended on appeal, impacting livelihood: order of suspension of registration of petitioner liable to be set aside. 2014 0 Supreme(Bom) 2082

However, vague allegations or unsubstantiated claims lead to discharge, not automatic release. In a discharge case, three violations were factually wrong, and records were deemed maintained. 2014 0 Supreme(Bom) 299

Release conditions must prevent misuse, aligning with the Act's intent to improve child sex ratios, as declining trends (e.g., 916 girls per 1000 boys) demand vigilance. 2015 0 Supreme(Raj) 286

Practical Recommendations for Compliance and Applications

To navigate seizures:- Maintain impeccable records: Complete Form F, consent forms, and report machine changes promptly.- Seek authorized inspections: Challenge unauthorized actions.- Apply for release judiciously: Furnish bank guarantees and prove no misuse risk.- Authorities: Impose strict conditions on any release.

Authorities should consider releasing the equipment only upon furnishing a bank guarantee... especially if the proceedings are lengthy. 2017 4 Supreme 511

Petitioners should balance hardship claims with enforcement needs, as courts scrutinize closely.

Conclusion and Key Takeaways

Generally, sonography machines seized under the PCPNDT Act should not be released on supurdagi without exceptional justification and safeguards like bank guarantees. This upholds the law's crusade against female feticide, ensuring equipment isn't reused illicitly. 2021 1 Supreme 541 2017 4 Supreme 511

Key Takeaways:- Strict compliance is non-negotiable; seizures are routine for violations.- Courts favor retention until case end to deter misuse.- Exceptions demand proof of hardship and security.- Always consult legal experts for tailored advice.

Stay compliant to protect your practice and contribute to a balanced society. For more legal updates, subscribe to our blog.

References: Cited judgments including 2017 4 Supreme 511, 2021 1 Supreme 541, 2018 2 Supreme 611, 2023 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 1787, 2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 362, 2015 0 Supreme(Raj) 286, 2015 0 Supreme(Bom) 391, 2014 0 Supreme(Bom) 299,

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA vs DR DEELIP PRABHAKAR KHARWADKAR