- (1.) By this criminal misc. petition, a challenge is made to the order dated 12.12.2014, whereby, charge for the offence under section 23 of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (for short 'the PCPNDT Act') has been framed against the petitioners. The revision petition challenging the said order has also been dismissed. A further challenge is made to the Notification dated 10.8.2009 at annexure-2.
(2.) Learned counsel submits that the Notification for appointment of Appropriate Authority is contrary to section 17 of the PCPNDT Act, as amended. As per section 17 of the PCPNDT Act, the Appropriate Authority should consist of three members, however, impugned Notification provides for an officer of the level of Sub Divisional Officer as appropriate authority at the district level. In view of above, impugned Notification deserves to be quashed along with subsequent proceedings. A reference of the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of Dr Manimegalai versus State, 2014 4 Crimes(Mad) 483has been given.
(3.) A further challenge is made to the order at annexure-3, issued by the Collector & District Magistrate, Ajmer, wherein, he has further authorised an officer for filing the complaint under section 28 of the PCPNDT Act. Further delegation is not permissible under the law. Mr GS Gill, Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State and Mr SK Gupta, Amicus Curiae, appointed by the court, submit that proper interpretation to section 17 of the PCPNDT Act has not been taken while challenging the Notification at annexure-2. Section 17 is divided in two parts for appointment of Appropriate Authority. The petitioners have considered only one part which refers to the appointment of the Appropriate Authority at the State level. Same composition is not provided for the Appropriate Authority at different level which would be for the part of the State. As per section 17 of the PCPNDT Act, whenever Appropriate Authority is to be appointed at the State level, it should be with the composition of 3 members as given under sub-section (3) of section 17. In case it is for the part of the State, the appointment of the Appropriate Authority would be as provided under sub-section (3) (b) of section 17. The aforesaid provision does not provide for composition of 3 members, rather, it refers about the rank of the officer.;