SUMITRA JANGID AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this criminal misc. petition, a challenge is made to the order dt. 16th March, 2015 framing charges for the offence under Secs. 5, 6 & 23 of Pre -conception and Pre -natal Diagnostic Techniques Act (for short "PCPNDT Act"). A challenge to the said order by a revision petition also failed, as the revision petition was dismissed vide order dt. 12th March, 2015. Learned counsel submits that case was initiated on a complaint, thus pre -charge evidence was recorded. The lady turned hostile, thus no case remained as other three witnesses were not having independent knowledge but was in reference to what was informed by the lady. In view of above, the petitioners should have been discharged by applying Sec. 245 of Cr.P.C. Learned Court below failed to consider the aforesaid while framing charges.

(2.) It is also stated that no diagnose was made otherwise, as per alleged information for birth of boy, girl would not have taken birth. It is a fact on record that lady concerned, had given birth to a girl. In the background aforesaid, the impugned order deserves to be quashed because when the main witness did not support the prosecution case in pre -charge evidence, conviction would be impossible.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition.