Court denies bail to doctor who escaped during PCPNDT raid

Published On 2017-08-22 08:30 GMT   |   Update On 2017-08-22 08:30 GMT
Advertisement

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has voiced concern over the declining sex ratio and said a lenient approach cannot be taken while deciding matters pertaining to violation of sex determination laws.


Justice T V Nalawade rejected an anticipatory bail application filed by a doctor, who was allegedly involved in a sex determination racket. The doctor was running a hospital in Pandharpur, a town in Solapur district located on the border of Maharashtra and Karnataka, where he allegedly conducted sex determination tests and illegally aborted a foetus.

Advertisement

The sex determination racket was exposed after the police raided his hospital and found a woman lying unconscious on the bed and the doctor along with his associates was seen around the bed by the raiding officials. The police also recovered sex determination equipment from the room. However, the doctor escaped from the spot and then approached the HC seeking pre-arrest relief.


“In Maharashtra, the ratio of the female child has come down to 800. The state is ensuring a strict compliance to the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act. Even doctors have been jailed,” Justice Nalawade said. “It is clear that due to this circumstance, now persons are going outside Maharashtra and the present incident is one of such incidents. It can be said that the persons, like the present applicant, who are doing business on (the state’s) boundary are misusing the circumstances and they are making money,” he said.


“Considering the object behind the enactments (of law) regarding abortion and sex determination, this court holds that lenient view cannot be taken and discretion cannot be used in favor of such person,” the high court said. In the present case, the abortion was caused only due to sex detection and many times, in such cases, there is a danger to the life of the mother also, the HC observed.

Tags:    

Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.

NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.

Our comments section is governed by our Comments Policy . By posting comments at Medical Dialogues you automatically agree with our Comments Policy , Terms And Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Similar News