36 days left — Registration closes 2026-10-31.
ProgrammesCruciblePricingScholarshipLegal UpdatesBlogDiagnostic TestApplyStudent Login
CLATcoach · Current Affairs
Legal Updates
Judgments · Amendments · Notifications
Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court: police can't prosecute PCPNDT offences, but doctors convicted for illegal abortions

High Court of Chhattisgarh1 min read
Illustration: a High Court · Criminal law

Hearing the State's appeal against an acquittal, the Chhattisgarh High Court partly reversed a 2016 judgment in a case against the doctors and operator of a hospital in Korba district. During a 2011 inspection, officials found foetuses aged about 16 to 32 weeks preserved in bottles, along with objectionable equipment, in the hospital's operation theatre. Police registered an FIR under Section 5 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, Section 22(3) of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994, and Section 315 IPC.

On the PCPNDT charge, the Court upheld the acquittal for a different reason. Section 28 of that Act bars any court from taking cognizance except on a complaint by the Appropriate Authority or a person who has given notice, and allows trial only by a Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate First Class. Police therefore have no authority to register, investigate and chargesheet such offences.

On the MTP Act and Section 315 IPC, however, the Court held that whether a termination was done in good faith to save the mother's life was within the accused's special knowledge, so the burden lay on them to show it. The accused rebutted neither the age of the foetuses, their presence in the hospital, nor any good-faith decision. The Court convicted them and listed the case for sentencing.

Quick check
Under Section 28 of the PCPNDT Act, 1994, as applied by the Chhattisgarh High Court, a court can take cognizance of an offence under the Act on:
  1. a police chargesheet after investigation
  2. a complaint by the Appropriate Authority or a person who has given the required notice
  3. a newspaper report
  4. a reference from the State Human Rights Commission
Show the answer ↓

Answer: B. Section 28 bars cognizance except on a complaint by the Appropriate Authority (or an authorised officer) or a person who has given the prescribed notice; a police chargesheet does not suffice.

Source document

Issued by High Court of Chhattisgarh. If this summary and the source differ, the source is right — tell us and we will correct it.