Judgment dated 12th September 2024
Cause title : Ravinder Kumar Vs State of Haryana
Case No: Civil Appeal No. 3747/2024
A Bench of Supreme Court Judges Hon'ble Justice Abhay S Oka and Hon'ble Justice Augustine George Masih allowed the Quashing Petition filed by the Petitioner on the ground that there was nothing to connect the accused with the offence except search and seizure documents.
Facts of the case are:
The appellant has been practicing as a general Physician since
2001 and as a Radiologist since 2007. On 27th April 2017, a team
comprising four officers raided the appellant's clinic. Based on the
complaint against one woman, Dhanpati (accused no.1), that she is
running a racket of sex determination and medical termination of
pregnancy, a decoy patient was selected. The allegation is that
Dhanpati was contracted to do the medical termination of the
pregnancy of the decoy patient. The decoy patient and shadow
witness, S.I. Usha Rani, informed Dhanpati that they knew the sex of
the foetus. Dhanpati called the decoy patient on 27th April 2017 at
8 am for MTP. The shadow witness informed Dhanpati that family
members of the decoy patient were suggesting reconfirming the sex of
the foetus through ultrasound.
Dhanpati called the shadow witness on 27th April 2017 at 7 am and
stated that the Doctor who would perform the ultrasound would charge
Rs.20,000/- but ultimately, she fixed the deal at Rs.15,000/-.
Accordingly, the decoy patient was given a sum of Rs.15,000/-. The
members of the search party, along with the police staff as well as
the shadow witness and decoy patient, went to the Gurugram bus stand
where Dhanpati asked for Rs.15,000/- which amount was handed over to
her. After that, a nurse, Anju (accused no.2), was called by
Dhanpati, and a part of the amount of Rs.15,000/- was given to her.
Thereafter, the decoy patient and others entered the appellant's
clinic, known as the Divine Diagnostic Centre at Gurugram.
The decoy patient was taken inside. When the decoy patient and Anju
came out of the diagnostic centre, the police caught them. The
search team entered the diagnostic centre. The cash amount was
seized, and the team recovered even the USG report for the decoy
patient. It was alleged that the appellant had signed the said
report.
A first information report was registered on 27th April 2017 in the
Police Station, Gurugram, alleging the commission of an offence
punishable under Section 23 of the PreConception and Pre-natal
Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994. It was followed by a complaint filed by
the District Appropriate Authority under Section 28(1) of the Act of
1994 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurugram,
alleging the commission of punishable offences against the
appellant, the said Dhanpati and Anju. The allegation against the
appellant and the co-accused was of indulging in the illegal
activity of sex determination of a foetus by using ultrasound.
The appellant filed a petition for quashing the complaint and the
FIR before the High Court. The High Court declined to quash both the
complaint and FIR.
Summary of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is:
"16. A perusal of the impugned FIR and impugned complaint
shows that its foundation is the material seized during the raid on
27th April 2017. Except for what was found in the search and the
seized documents, there is nothing to connect the accused with the
offence punishable under Section 23 of the 1994 Act. As the search
itself is entirely illegal, continuing prosecution based on such an
illegal search will amount to abuse of the process of law. The High
Court ought to have noticed the illegality we have pointed out.
17. Therefore, the appeal is allowed, and the impugned judgment
dated 13th January 2023 is set aside. FIR No.408, dated 27th April
2017, registered in the Police Station, Gurugram at Gurugram, is
hereby quashed. The complaint bearing no. COMA No.40 of 2018,
pending before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Gurugram, also stands quashed."
Download Judgment dated 12th September 2024 in Ravinder Kumar Vs State of Haryana, Civil Appeal No. 3747/2024.