UDAYSINGH MANSINGH PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K.C.Sant, learned Advocate for the Applicant, Mr. A.R.Kale, learned A.P.P. for non- applicant No. 1 ­ State and Mr. S.C.Swami & Ms.S.L.Pansambal holding for Mr. V.D.Gunale, learned Advocate for non-applicant No. 2.

(2.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

(3.) The applicant has approached this Court praying that the Judgment passed by the Sessions Court dismissing the Revision filed by the applicant be set aside and the order passed by the learned Magistrate framing charge against the applicant for the offences u/ss 4 (3),5,6,29 read with Section 28 of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques [Prohibition of Sex Selection] Act, 1994 [hereinafter referred as 'PC & PNDT Act, 1994] and under Rule 9 (1) (4) (10) (1-A) of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques [Prohibition of Sex Selection] Rules, 1996 [hereinafter referred as 'PC & PNDT Rules, 1996] be set aside. The copy of the order passed by the learned Magistrate in R.C.C. No. 583/2011 on 10/03/2014 is not on record. The learned Advocate for the petitioner sought liberty to place the copy of the above order on record as Exh. H-1. Liberty granted subject to depositing Rs. 2,000/- [Rupees Two Thousand] with the High Court Legal Services Sub- Committee, Aurangabad and producing receipt on record of this application within 2 weeks from today.