Implementation of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 HAQ: Center for Child Rights B1/2, Ground Floor, Malviya Nagar New Delhi - 110017 Tel: +91-26677412,26673599 Fax: +91-26674688 Website: www.haqcrc.org FaceBook Page: https://www.facebook.com/HaqCentreForChildRights

1. Implementation of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal
Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection)
Act, 1994
By Atishya Kumar
Vth Semester Student, NUALS, Kochi
Internship at HAQ: Centre for Child Rights
Internship Period- June 1st
, 2015 to June 28th
, 2015
India is a patriarchal society. Son preference and discrimination against the girl child is seen
in almost the whole of the country. One method of its manifestation is through sex selection,
i.e. elimination of female foetuses using the technique of sex determination.1
This practice
has led to a decline in the female population of the country. According to the 2011 census,
there are 943 females for every 1000 males in India.2
Concerned with the dwindling population of females in the country in 1996 the Central
Government enacted the Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act,
1994 (PNDT Act). This law was aimed to curb sex selective elimination of foetuses by
criminalising pre-natal sex determination and making it mandatory for all sonography clinics,
labs, nursing homes, etc. to be registered with the State or District Appropriate Authority
formulated under Section 17 of the Act.
In the year 2000, Centre for Enquiry into Health and Allied Themes (CEHAT), a research
organisation; Mahila Sarvangin Utkarsh Mandal (MASUM), a Non-Governmental
organization and Dr. Sabu M. George, a civil society member filed a Public Interest
Litigation in the Supreme Court contending that despite the enactment of this particular
legislation, it’s provisions are not being implemented by either the Central Government or the
State Governments. The Supreme Court asked for affidavits from all States and it took nearly
one year for all States to file their reply. After going through the written submissions the
1
Dr Shalini Phansalkar Joshi’s Compilation and Analysis of Case-laws on Pre-conception and Pre-natal
Diagnostics Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994, Supported by United Nations Population Fund
(http://countryoffice.unfpa.org/india/drive/Compilation_and_Analysis_of_Case_Laws_on_Pre_Conception.pdf -
last visited on 25th June, 2015)
2
http://www.census2011.co.in/sexratio.php (Last visited on 25th June, 2015)

2. Hon’ble Court reached the conclusion that in the five year of the legislation being enacted,
not much has been done for its implementation and gave various directions to both Central
and State Governments and the bodies formed under the Act to ensure that the purpose of the
Act is better served. Both State and Central Governments were directed to create public
awareness against the practice of pre-natal sex determination and female foeticide using
releases and electronic media and to implement the Act with all vigour and zeal.3
Central
Supervisory Board was directed to review and monitor the implementation of the Act and to
meet once every 6 months. It was also to examine the necessity to amend the Act in view of
the emerging technology of pre conception sex selection and difficulties encountered in
implementation of the Act and direct the functioning of State Appropriate Authorities. State
Governments were directed to immediately appoint fully empowered Appropriate Authorities
at district and sub-district levels which were to be aided by Advisory Committees. These
Appropriate Authorities would be answerable to Central Supervisory Board and they were
further directed to take appropriate criminal action in case of violation of the provisions of
the Act.4
The Supreme Court called for the compliance reports at a later date but when these
compliance reports were not filed by the States, the Hon’ble Court in anguish had to pass
another order containing further directions so that appropriate criminal action is taken
against medical practitioners in contravention of the Act. On the suggestion of the Central
Government Supreme Court ordered setting up of National Inspection and Monitoring
Committee for the implementation of the Act.5
Finally, in 2003 after being satisfied with
compliance of the given directions, the Act was amended to bring within its purview the
misuse of pre-conception and pre-natal diagnostic techniques and was titled as the Pre-
conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act and the
case was disposed off after giving certain directions for creating public awareness, proper
maintenance of records of meeting of Appropriate Authorities with Advisory Committees and
giving direction to Central Supervisory Board to appoint State Advisory Boards.6
Hence, it was after this case that the PCPNDT Act got the form it has today.
Since the enactment of this legislation up to December 2014, there have only been 206
convictions under this Act.7
Till June, 2011 there were only 874 ongoing cases.8
The
3
(2001) 5 SCC 577
4
Ibid
5
(2003) 8 SCC 406
6
Ibid
7
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=116303 (Last visited on 25th
June, 2015)

3. improvement in the overall sex ratio has been very marginal and for 0-6 years, it has actually
worsened-from 927 in 2001 to 919 in 2011 for every 1000 males. In the recent times there
have been various Public Interest Litigations filed by social activists in various states because
the Act’s provisions were not being implemented properly. Court on its own motion v. State
of Punjab & Ors9
, Gaurav Goyal v. State of Haryana10
, Hemanta Rath v. Union of India &
Ors11
, S.K. Gupta v. Union of India & Ors12
are a few examples. All four of these cases were
filed because the data available showed very few convictions under the Act. In Gaurav Goyal
v. State of Haryana13
and Hemanta Rath v. Union of India & Ors14
there were newspaper
reports of foetuses and human body parts being found in various areas including near nursing
homes. The High Court gave various directions to the State Governments and State
Appropriate Authority for better implementation including disposing off all cases within 6
months of the judgement.
The most important case recently was of Voluntary Health Ass. Of Punjab v. Union of India
& Ors.15
The Voluntary Health association of Punjab, an NGO filed a writ petition in the
Hon’ able Supreme Court of India in 2006 against Union of India and Ors., for effective
implementation of Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex
Selection) Act, 1994. As for one reason or the other, the practice of female infanticide still
prevails. In its judgement, the Apex Court gave a list of 11 directions that the Centre and the
State governments had to comply with. The State and District Appropriate Authorities were
asked to report all charges to the State Medical Council, ensure that all labs and clinics are
registered according to the Pre-Conception and Pre- Natal Diagnostic Techniques
(Prohibition of Sex Selection) Rules of 1996 and maintain proper records of all patients. The
State governments were asked to map all clinics, spread awareness by conducting workshops
and monitor the status of pending cases. The courts were asked to dispose all pending cases
within 6 months.
The main problem is that there is no data available as to the registered sonography centres in
India. There are also various loopholes in the Act. For example, in the case of Dr. K.L.
8
http://www.hrln.org/hrln/images/stories/pdf/arguemnts-supreme-court-orders-on-proper-implementation-of-
pcpndt-act.pdf (Last visited on 25th
June, 2015)
9
Civil Writ Petition No. 17964 of 2007
10
Civil Writ Petition No. 15152 of 2007
11
AIR 2004 Ori 71
12
D.B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No. 3270/ 2012
13
Supra n. 10
14
Supra n. 11
15
(2013) 4 SCC 1

4. Sehgal v. Office of District Appropriate Authority and Dr. Sonal Randhawa v. Union of India
& Ors.16
The question raised for consideration filed before the Delhi High Court was about
the meaning that should be given to the expression 'sonologist' under the PCPNDT Act. There
are cases where pregnancy is terminated by conducting operations on women while they are
unconscious and in many cases it’s not even safe for women. In the case of Dr. Saraswati
Mundhe v. The State of Maharashtra & Dr. Raghunath17
, the woman who was operated on,
died after the operation.
Quite a few measures have been taken recently to ensure better implementation of the Act.
According to a report released by Press Information Bureau of Government of India, various
steps are being taken. Five regional review workshops for North, West, central, north east and
Southern regions were organized at Srinagar, Pune, Hyderabad, Kolkata and Bhopal during
2013-14 to evaluate and review the progress of implementation of the PC&PNDT Act, 1994
in the country.18
The report also mentioned that the Central Government provides financial
support to the States and UTs for operation of PNDT Cells, Capacity Building, Orientation &
Sensitization Workshop, Information, Education and Communication campaigns and for
strengthening structures for the implementation of the PC & PNDT Act, 1994 under the
National Health Mission (NHM). The directions given by the Apex Court in Voluntary
Health Ass. Of Punjab v. Union of India & Ors.19
were immediately complied with and
inspections of labs and clinics have become more regular and the Central Supervisory Board
meets regularly.20
The problem of female foeticide is far from being solved but small steps are being taken in
the right direction. Changes are happening but very slowly. There are many social activists
who keep trying to keep the Government on its toes and also give suggestions in their PILs.
We need both the Central and State Governments to conduct regular inspections and ensure
that all labs and clinics are duly registered. A lot of loopholes have to be covered so that no-
one goes scot free only due to the fact that there wasn’t sufficient evidence available against
him. More than anything, awareness needs to be spread so that people understand the
importance of girl child and stop discrimination.
16
AIR 2011 Delhi 48 (NOC)
17
Criminal Application 3350 of 2013
18
Supra n. 7
19
Supra n. 15
20
Supra n.7