STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. DR. ANIL BANSAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Regular Criminal Case No. 29/2012 Dr. Anil Bansal was ordered to be charged under Rules 9(1) and 18(8) of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Rules, 1996 (for short 'the PCPNDT Rules, 1996') read with Section 23 of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (for short 'the Act of 1994'). Accused Dr. Anil Bansal filed a revision petition in the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar, District Sri Ganganagar and the said Criminal Revision No. 29/2012 titled as Dr. Anil Bansal v. State & Anr. was decided on 20.7.2012 by that Court and that Court has discharged the accused Dr. Anil Bansal from the charges of breach of Rules 9(1) and 18(8) of the PCPNDT Rules, 1996 read with Section 23 of the PCPNDT Act, 1994. Now, the State of Rajasthan has challenged the order dated 20.7.2012 passed by the Revisional Court.

(2.) I have heard arguments of both the sides. It has been argued by the petitioners that the Revisional Court has seriously erred in discharging the accused-respondent while considering the merits of the case, whereas it is settled principle of law that at the time of framing of the charge, only prima facie case is to be taken into consideration and the evidence brought on record clearly established a prima facie case against the respondent and so the order framing charge against the accused-respondent should not have been quashed by the Revisional Court. It has been prayed that the impugned order dated 20.7.2012 should be quashed and the order of the Trial Court in this regard should be restored.

(3.) On the other hand, it has been argued on behalf of the accused-respondent Dr. Anil Bansal that he has rightly been discharged by the Revisional Court because it is settled position of law that under the PCPNDT Act, 1994, it is only the Competent Officer who can make the inspection and as per the papers, particularly Ex.P-11, it is clear that for the whole District, the Collector was the Competent Officer for the purpose of the PCPNDT Act, 1994 and for Revenue Sub-Division of Raisinghnagar, District Sri Ganganagar, Deputy Chief Medical and Health Officer (Health), Sri Ganganagar was the only Competent Officer. This order was in force on 13.1.2009.