Delhi HC quashes FIR against doctor in foetus gender disclosure case

Delhi High Court has quashed an FIR against a doctor in a case of alleged disclosure of a foetus' sex, saying there was nothing to show that the pre-diagnostic techniques conducted by the medical practitioner were in violation of the law.

The high court said it was clear that the uncontroverted allegations against the woman doctor were merely limited to the claim that she performed ultrasound on the decoy patient.

"There is nothing placed on record to satisfy this court that the operation so performed by the petitioner (doctor) was in contravention of the law," Justice Chandra Dhari Singh said in an order passed last month.

"There is no averment made to satisfy this court that the pre-diagnostic techniques were conducted by the petitioner in violation of Section 4 of the PC and PNDT Act, or that the petitioner herself determined or communicated the sex of the foetus, violating Section 5 and 6 of the PC and PNDT Act," according to the order.

The Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PC and PNDT) Act prohibits the use of prenatal diagnostic techniques to determine the sex of a foetus.

The court said it was satisfied that a prima facie case had not been made out against the doctor.

In August 2020, a raid or decoy operation was conducted at an ultrasound centre in Hari Nagar.

A case was registered on allegations that an ultrasound was conducted by the petitioner doctor on a decoy patient and the alleged disclosure of sex of the foetus was made by another person who was an employee at the lab.

Police lodged an FIR under provisions of the PC and PNDT Act and the doctor was arrested before later being granted bail.

She approached the high court, seeking quashing of the FIR.

The doctor submitted that the police had not filed a chargesheet despite more than three years having passed, suggesting there was no case to be made out against her.

It was submitted that the petitioner had deep roots in society and the presence of the FIR against her would impact her standing.

The prosecution opposed the plea, saying the ultrasound was conducted by the petitioner and the alleged disclosure of the foetus' sex was done by a co-accused.

The high court noted that the specific role assigned to the petitioner was merely limited to conducting ultrasound on the decoy patient and there was no allegation made in the FIR against her which, when considered uncontroverted, made out a prima facie case against her under the PC and PNDT Act.

"It is also important to note that there has been an inordinate delay in filing the chargesheet. Therefore, this court is of the considered view that the present FIR is liable to be quashed to avoid any further harassment to the petitioner," it said.