DR. SUREN PRASAD DASH Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel.

(2.) The petitioner challenges the order of cognizance dated 20.07.2015 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur in 2(c) C .C.Case No.963 of 2015 under Sections 22(3), 23(1), 23(2), 23(3) and 25 of the Pre-Conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 and also prays for quashing the entire proceeding on the ground that no offence has been made out as per the allegations made in the complaint filed by the authorities.

(3.) The complaint petition in the aforesaid case filed under Annexure-1 reveals that surprise inspection of Ultra Sound Clinic of the petitioner was made on 12.06.2015 by a team along with the Executive Magistrate and the local Police and it was found that petitioner's ultra sound machine having model No.RT 3200 was dysfunctional since last two years and no information was given to the District Appropriate Authority under PC and PNDT Act and therefore, it was alleged to be a violation of Rule 13 of the PC and PNDT Rules, 1996, which is punishable under the sections of the Act for which cognizance has been taken.