Punjab and Haryana High Court: Doctor Cannot Face PCPNDT Trial Without Evidence in Illegal Sex Determination Case

A doctor cannot face criminal prosecution under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PCPNDT Act), merely because his name remained on a diagnostic centre's registration panel after leaving the clinic, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled.

In Dr. Shyam Bihari v. State of Haryana, Justice Yashvir Singh Rathor restored the trial court's discharge order after finding no prima facie evidence linking the radiologist to an alleged illegal prenatal sex determination during a 2016 raid at Janta Diagnostic Centre in Hansi, Haryana. The court delivered the judgment on July 3, 2026, and the detailed order was uploaded on July 10.

Justice Rathor observed, "A prima facie case requires some material of a substantive nature linking the accused to the offence," adding that administrative omissions or delayed updates in registration records cannot, by themselves, amount to a criminal offence.

According to court records, a joint team of Haryana health officials conducted a decoy operation at Janta Diagnostic Centre in Hansi in July 2016 after receiving secret information about alleged illegal prenatal sex determination. During the operation, officials recovered marked currency notes from the clinic owner, following which an FIR was registered under the PCPNDT Act and relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code.

Although Dr. Bihari was later named as an accused, the High Court noted that his name did not appear in the original FIR or the spot proceedings. The court found that he had left the Hansi clinic in November 2012 and was working as a consultant radiologist at Health Map Diagnostic, Civil Hospital, Gurgaon, on the day of the raid. Attendance records supported his claim, while the ultrasound report and mandatory Form F identified another radiologist as the clinic's registered operator.

The High Court held that a doctor's continued appearance on a diagnostic centre's registration panel, without evidence of involvement in the alleged offence, cannot by itself justify prosecution under the PCPNDT Act. It also clarified that a medical practitioner cannot be held criminally liable simply because a clinic or the authorities failed to remove the doctor's name from its registration records after the end of employment.

Interpreting Rule 3(3)(3) of the PCPNDT Rules, the bench observed that there is "no statutory bar or restriction" preventing a qualified medical practitioner from being registered at diagnostic centres in different districts or states. Since Dr. Bihari was registered at centres in separate districts, the High Court found no statutory violation. It also noted that the operation of the rule has already been stayed by various High Courts.

The Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994, prohibits sex selection before or after conception and regulates the use of prenatal diagnostic techniques to curb sex-selective practices. The law also requires diagnostic centres to maintain registration records, complete mandatory forms, and comply with registration requirements.

In this case, the Punjab and Haryana High Court clarified that while the Act imposes strict compliance requirements, administrative lapses such as an outdated registration panel cannot, by themselves, establish a doctor's criminal liability.¹

Also see: Madhya Pradesh High Court Refuses to Quash Criminal Case Against Government Doctor Accused of Denying Treatment Over Payment

Allowing Dr. Bihari's revision petition, the Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside the 29 October 2018 order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, and restored the trial court's 12 April 2017 order discharging him from the case. The bench held that the prosecution had failed to present prima facie material linking the doctor to the alleged offences under the PCPNDT Act or the Indian Penal Code. The court also disposed of all pending miscellaneous applications, bringing the proceedings against Dr. Bihari to a close.

References:

1. Punjab and Haryana High Court. Dr. Shyam Bihari v. State of Haryana, CRR-3912-2018 (O&M), decided July 3, 2026. Judgment uploaded July 10, 2026. https://highcourtchd.gov.in/

(Rh/TP/MSM)