Karnataka High Court Denies Plea to Quash Criminal Proceedings in Sex Determination Case
The Karnataka High Court has firmly refused to quash criminal proceedings against three accused individuals, including a radiologist employed at a government hospital in Ramanagara. This case revolves around allegations of an illegal sex determination test and subsequent termination of a pregnancy based on the foetus's gender.
Details of the Case and Accused Parties
The legal action was initiated after a woman, who already had two daughters, underwent a scanning procedure. It is alleged that her pregnancy was terminated upon discovery that the foetus was female. Among the three accused who approached the high court were a couple from Byrapatna. They challenged the proceedings brought against them under Section 4 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act-1971 and Sections 3(5) and 91 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita-2023.
The radiologist, identified as accused No. 1 in the case and responsible for conducting the scan, separately contested the charges filed against him. These charges pertain to an offence punishable under Section 23 of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act-1994.
Arguments Presented and Court Observations
While the couple asserted their innocence, claiming no involvement in the case, the radiologist argued that he merely performed the scan, which he contended is legally permissible. However, Justice M Nagaprasanna noted that the evidence on record, prima facie, suggests the couple deliberately sought to determine the sex of the unborn child. This pursuit, allegedly driven by gender prejudice, involved a series of clandestine consultations, covert referrals, and illegal medical interventions.
The judge emphasized that each accused played a distinct role—some as facilitators, others as intermediaries, and the radiologist as a medical professional—forming a continuous chain of alleged culpability. The court observed that the couple, accused no. 4 and 5, were not passive or peripheral figures but rather acted as conduits through whom patients were procured and channelled for sex determination and subsequent sex-selective termination.
Allegations of Monetary Negotiations and Medical Consequences
According to the complaint, after the foetus was identified as female, monetary negotiations allegedly occurred, medication was administered to terminate the pregnancy, and the woman was discharged. She reportedly suffered profuse bleeding the same night, resulting in the death of the foetus.
Justice Nagaprasanna highlighted that at this preliminary stage, it would be inappropriate to examine the episode in isolation or exonerate individual accused by compartmentalising their roles, especially when the allegations indicate a concerted and cumulative design.
Broader Implications and Legal Stance
The judge underscored that female foeticide is not merely a statutory offence but a moral blight and a constitutional affront. He referenced the Supreme Court's repeated emphasis that leniency in such matters at the threshold risks rendering the law ineffective and emboldening those who exploit gender discrimination under the guise of medical expertise. The truth of the allegations, the degree of individual culpability, and the veracity of evidence are all matters that must be thoroughly examined during the trial process.
This ruling reinforces the judiciary's commitment to addressing gender-based crimes and upholding legal standards in medical ethics. The case will proceed to trial, where the accused will have the opportunity to present their defence against these serious charges.
