This site is intended for Healthcare professionals only.
×

Rajasthan: 10 years jail for PC-PNDT violations from now on

Rajasthan: 10 years jail for PC-PNDT violations from now on

Jaipur: Punishment for sex determination activities just got harder in the state. It is reported that state government has now started booking sex determination crimes under Section 315 of the IPC, which calls for upto 10 years jail or fine or both for violations. It is reported that the said section of the Indian Penal Code pertains to an Act done with intent to prevent child being born alive or to cause it to die after birth and thus calls for higher punishment than the provisions of the PC-PNDT Act.

In particular, Section 315 of the Indian Penal Code specifies

 Act done with intent to prevent child being born alive or to cause it to die after birth.—Whoever before the birth of any child does any act with the intention of thereby preventing that child from being born alive or causing it to die after its birth, and does by such act prevent that child from being born alive, or causes it to die after its birth, shall, if such act be not caused in good faith for the purpose of saving the life of the mother, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, or with fine, or with both.

This is contrast to the PC-PNDT ACT, violations under which call for imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees and on any subsequent conviction, with imprisonment which may extend to five years and with fine which may extend to fifty thousand rupees.

It is reported that the authorities have already started bringing harsher punishments to effect, by lodging several cases under this section, in order to demoralize the practice of sex determination..

Medical Dialogues had earlier reported about a decoy operation by PCPNDT cell of Rajasthan, where a doctor from Himmatnagar in Gujarat was arrested.  TOI reports The PCPNDT cell imposed Section 315 of IPC and arrested the accused and brought him to Rajasthan. Earlier to this, two cases were also registered in a similar fashion after decoy operations in Haryana and Uttar Pradesh

This comes after expert legal advice, as the state appropriate authority (PCPNDT) Navin Jain has directed his officials to arrest the accused under Section 315 of IPC

The move brings a clear advantage to the authorities in terms of their mandates of operations .A PCPNDT cell official informed TOI that in order to conduct decoy operations for arresting accused in other states, they need to take the other state’s appropriate authority (PCPNDT) in confidence. Every state has its own PCPNDT cell. But, under Section 315 of IPC, they have the power to arrest the accused from all other states, except for Jammu and Kashmir. Rajasthan’s PCPNDT cell started imposing Section 315 of IPC in October last year. Till date, it has imposed the section in eight cases.

Also , it has been further pointed out that the accused can get a bail when sections of PCPNDT Act are imposed but when Section 315 of IPC is imposed, it is difficult to get bail.

It is further added that the Rajasthan health department have appointed ACP Raghuveer Singh as thw new head of the PCPNDT cell, who has conducted three decoy operations outside the state in UP, Haryana and Gujarat.

 

5 comment(s) on Rajasthan: 10 years jail for PC-PNDT violations from now on

Share your Opinion Disclaimer

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Most Voted
  1. user
    Dr Kusuma Kumari G Nellore July 28, 2016, 10:46 pm

    ANyway tougher laws may end female feticide in India to a large extend.

  2. its like a fixed match where result is predecided
    every one who operated usg is guilty of sex determination unless he satisfy pndt rules
    wears white coat with label
    fills f form correctly
    signs forms
    gets consent
    obtains patient sign
    preserves referral slips
    prints reports with name sign declaration etc etc
    gets all id proofs
    preserves usg films
    sends all forms to AA BY 5TH
    KEEPS ALL BOARDS AND MACHINES REGISTERED
    MAINTAINS ALL REGISTERES

    IF HE /SHE IS FOUND FLUTING ANY OF ABOVE THEN SHE IS GUILTY OF SEX DETEREMINATION UNLESS PROVED BY HIM
    ALL RECORDS TO BE PRESERVED FOR 2Y
    BURDEN OF PROOF ON PERSON CONDUCTING SONOGRAPHY TO PROVE HIS INNOCENCE
    AA HAS TO JUST FIND DEFICIENCY IN ANY OF ABOVE RULES

    ONCE CASE FILED NO FURTHER REGISTRATION ALLOWED
    CASE TAKES 4YRS AND IF CONVICTED LOOSES REGT FOR 5 YRS

    NO ONE CAN TAKE ACTION AGAINST AA TAKE UP

    SO ONCE AA FINDS ANY DEFECT IN ANY OF RULES IT CAN FILE CASE AND U CAN BE RUINED FOR 9-10 YRS STRAIGHTWAY

    AA DOESNOT HAVE TO PROVE ANYTHING OTHERTHAN DEFECT IN RECORDS ETC .
    MORAL OF STORY THERE SO MANY POINTS WHICH CAN LAND U IN NET OF PCPNDT ACT IF U DO FOETAL SCANNING AND ITS NEAR IMPOSSIBLE TO BE PERFECT RECORD KEEPER AND IF U ARE EMPLOYEE ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO KEEP RECORD AS PER UR WISHES AND IF OWNER IS LAX U CAN STRAIGHT WAY IN TROUBLE.

    RAJASTHAN PNDT CELL WILL FILE CASE U/S 315 SO THEY WILL MAKE SURE ONE GET 10 YRS TERM FOR ABOVE DEFICIENCIES
    REGARDING RESPECTED COURTS . BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON PERSON CONDUCTING USG
    ANY F FORM DEFICIENCY IS INDEPENDENT OFFENCE
    ITS LIKE ASKING SURGEON TO MAKE PERFECT INCISION AS IN BOOK IF HE DOES SLIGHTLY WRONG CHARGE HIM WITH CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

    MORAL OF STORY IS PLAY SAFE
    DONT DO FOETAL SCANS
    DO SIMPLE ABDOMINAL AND NON FOETAL SCANS
    BENEFITS
    NO RECORD TO KEEP
    NO FORM TO FILL
    NO CHANCE OF FALLING UNDER SEC 23

    PLAY SAFE PLAY SIMPLE LIVE HAPPY LOOK AFTER UR FAMILY

  3. Why not the parents punished it is a demand /supply problem the person who asks for it is equally guilty

  4. user
    Surinder Paul Jindal July 26, 2016, 9:12 am

    There should be provision of same punishment for patients, who approach doctors for sex determination of unborn. There should be CCTV in chamber of doctor, which should record patient conversation.

  5. THAT\’S GOOD

Source: with inputs

Opinion Polls

Should Government Doctors be allowed to do Private Practice?