MANIMEGALAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is arrayed as Al in SC 117 of 2008 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (Additional Sessions Judge), Krishnagiri and facing trial for the offences under Sections 5(2) r/w Section 25(a) and (b) of the Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1994 which was substituted by the Pre-Conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (Act 14 of 2003).

(2.) The petitioner has come forward with this petition to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioner for the offences referred to under the aforesaid Act, mainly by questioning the locus standi of the de facto complainant to lodge any complaint and the maintainability of the proceedings on the basis of the police report. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner would, by resorting to Sections 17 and 28 of the Act, seriously argue that any complaint regarding the act constituting the offence under this Act, shall be made by ppropriate authority constituted by the State Government and the same shall be by way of private complaint before the Court concerned and no other authority except appropriate authority, shall maintain any complaint except in the manner provided under Section 23 of the Act.

(3.) For better appreciation of the contention so raised on the side of the petitioner/ Al, the relevant provisions of Sections 17(2) and (3) and 28(1) to (3) are to be extracted hereunder :-