- (1.) By these criminal misc. petitions, a challenge is made to the complaint and subsequent orders of cognizance of the offence under Pre Conception and Pre Natal Diagonistic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (in short "the Act of 1994").
(2.) A criminal complaint was filed against the petitioners apart from others for violation of various provisions of the Act of 1994 and the rules made thereunder. The complaint aforesaid was filed under Section 28 of the Act of 1994. In pursuace to the complaint, cognizance of offence was taken in majority of the cases. A challenge to the complaint as well as order for cognizance of offence has been made on various grounds.
(3.) Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that an inspection was made by the person not authorized under the Act of 1994. A reference of Section 17 & 17A of the Act of 1994 was given to show as to who is authorized to inspect diagnostic lab or clinic, etc. As per Sections 17 and 17A of the Act of 1994, authority of inspection lies with the Appropriate Authority and the Advisory Committee. The inspection can be made by the person having qualification as is required for the Appropriate Authority or Advisory Committee under Sections 17 & 17A of the Act of 1994. In the instant cases, inspection was not caused by the authorised person, thus not only inspection vitiates but subsequent complaint and the order of cognizance of offence also.;