RISHI KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Application, under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Hereinafter, in short, referred to as ' Cr.P.C .'), has been filed by the applicant, Rishi Kumar Sharma, with a prayer for setting aside cognizance taking order, alongwith entire proceeding, of Criminal Complaint Case No.8801/9 of 2012, State vs. Rishi Kumar Sharma and others , under Sections- 6, 23, 25 and 28 of the Pre-conceptional Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (Hereinafter, in short, referred to as PCPNDT Act), Police Station-Mawana, District Meerut.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is the owner of Mawana Diagnostic Centre, Mawana, District Meerut. As per the inspection report, he was not present on the spot at the time of alleged sex determination made by Jitendra, under assistance of Anuj. Both of those employees were neither authorised nor entitled for making any Ultrasonogrohy or sex determination. They were said to have received Rs.3,000/-, as fee, for making above diagnostic test, which was not under authority of the applicant and applicant was of no concern with above occurrence. In first information report as well as in complaint, it has been specifically mentioned that Dr. Mahesh Kumar Sharma and the applicant, Rishi Kumar Sharma, were not present on the spot. Mere allegation of gross negligence for keeping open the Ultrasonography Portable Machine is against the applicant for which no criminal liability can be fastened. There may be gross negligence, but, that too, may not be with any criminal intention or offence. Hence, this complaint, alongwith cognizance taking order, passed over it, is under abuse of process of law. Thus, this Application, with above prayer.

(3.) Learned AGA, representing State of U.P., has vehemently opposed this Application, moved, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., with this contention that admittedly applicant is the owner of above Diagnostic Centre, from where, information of sex determination test, being conducted, has been received and a raid by an authorised team was made, wherein, Jitendra and Anuj were apprehended, while making sex determination test of a foetus for which money was paid and the same was also recovered instantly. This Clinic was of the applicant and applicant, alongwith his employees, were beneficiary of this illegal act. Hence, this complaint was filed, under correct perspective of law and this Court, in exercise of inherent jurisdiction, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., is not to embark upon factual matrix. Prima facie there was sufficient evidence for passing of impugned summoning order. Hence, this Application be rejected.