SHAM LAL THUKRAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is for setting aside the order dated 19.9.2011 passed by the Fast Track Court, Bathinda, whereby the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 9.7.2008 (Annexure P -4) has been set aside. A case was registered on the statement of Dr. Dalip Kumar, the then Civil Surgeon Bathinda, alleging that on 5.8.2006 he had received a secret information that operation of a lady was being conducted after she had undergone a ultrasound test at Thukral Surgical and Maternity Hospital, Bathinda. Dr. Ramesh Rani Thukral with the help of Dr. Sham Lal Thukral, who was posted as SMO Talwandi Sabo, used to conduct tests of male/female sex determination and thereby conduct operations. Dr. Dhira Gupta, Gynecologist along with Tirath Ram Steno and Sadhu Ram Kasla Project Officer P.N.D.T. Cell Bathinda, reached Thukral Hospital where Anil Kumar N.G.O. Maur Mandi kept him and the matter was inquired. Two ladies were sitting, Sukhpal Kaur wife of Gurtej Singh told that yesterday her Devrani Sukhjinder Kaur wife of Kamaljit Singh had undergone ultrasound scanning for which they have deposited Rs. 3,000/ -. Sukhjinder Kaur was having a female fetus of a girl child and they were asked to come at 10/11 P.M. for operation. Further information was gathered that operation after determination of the sex of the fetus is carried out and there was violation of the P.N.D.T. Act. In this background the FIR was registered.

(2.) THE challan was presented without the report of the Chemical Examiner and the accused were challaned under Sections 4, 5, 6, 23, 29 of P.N.D.T. And 4/ 5 of the MTP Act and Sections 313 to 315 of IPC.

(3.) COUNSEL for the complainant seeks clarification of the order that re -investigation could not be ordered and it was only further investigation as per section 173(8) Cr.P.C. which could be conducted. After going through the order dated 19.9.2011 it is only the re -investigation which has been set aside. There is no bar that after the parties were directed to appear before the order, the CJM could not order further investigation as per Section 173(8) Cr.P.C.