This is a study of actions initiated by the Government in last 2 years under the P.C-P.N.D.T act in state of Delhi. The study is very relevant considering the continously declining sex ratios in Delhi .
Implementation of P.C-P.N.D.T act in state of Delhi between 2008-2010
Study to see the implementation of Pre Conception And Pre Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act (P.C-P.N.D.T Act) In State Of Delhi.<br />Presented By – <br /> Mitu Khurana, <br />Vinod Goyal,<br /> Sharvari Ubale<br />2/11/2011<br />1<br />
INTRODUCTION<br />The major prohibitions under the PC-P.N.D.T Act are-<br /><ul><li>Prohibition of sex selection ,before and after conception(section 3A of the act)
Prohibition of advertisement of any technique for sex selection as well as sex determination (Sec 22 of the Act)
Prohibition on sale of ultrasound machines to persons not registered under this Act (Rule 3A)</li></ul>2/11/2011<br />2<br />
Penalties for the offences<br />2/11/2011<br />3<br />
Gujarat High Court in “Suo Motu Vs State Of Gujarat - on 30 September, 2008” <br /><ul><li>Any improper maintenance of record in itself is equivalent to violation of the provisions of sections 5 and 6 (sub-section (3) of section 4 of the act.
Cases where the form F is not filled at all, or where the vital details are lacking, such that the woman who has undergone the ultrasound cannot be identified, than this lapse cannot be passed over as a procedural lapse, and has to be in all seriousness tried in a court of law.</li></ul>2/11/2011<br />5<br />
Centre For Enquiry Into Health And Allied Themes (C.E.H.A.T) & Ors V. Union Of India & Ors <br /><ul><li>Directed the appropriate authorities to take prompt action against all bodies who are operating without a valid certificate of registration under the act.
The centers which are unregistered are required to be prosecuted by the authorities under provisions of the act and there is no question of issue of warning and to permit them to continue their illegal activities.
Appropriate authorities or any officer of the central or the state government authorized in this behalf is required to file complaint under section 28 of the act for prosecuting the offenders.</li></ul>2/11/2011<br />6<br />
National Support And Monitoring Cell (NSMC) In A Five Month (15th May -14th October 06) Activity Report <br />Gave the observations that in state of Delhi- <br /><ul><li>There was no list of the 81 complaints/ prosecutions supposedly launched by the state authorities.
Court cases were supposedly launched only against 3 out of 35 unregistered establishments found during raids
Out of other 46 complaints where cases were supposed to be launched-1 clinic registration has been cancelled, 1 clinic fine was imposed of Rs.15,000/- only and Court cases were launched against 19 cases, out of which 8 cases were later withdrawn at various stages. </li></ul>2/11/2011<br />7<br />
(NSMC) concluded their study stating that in state of Delhi <br /><ul><li> Neither transparency nor clarity in the functioning of the Authorities authorized under the PNDT Act.
Wrong-reporting regarding the number of court cases filed.
Lack of accountability and will to enforce the law.
The State is totally complacent on the issue, and there is no monitoring of actions prescribed in the Act,
Total irresponsible reporting in flagrant violation of norms, rules and regulations.</li></ul>2/11/2011<br />8<br />
OBJECTIVE<br />To Study The Actions Taken Under The P.C- P.N.D.T Act By The Implementing Authorities In Delhi During The Time Period From March 2008-march 2010 (Data Received By R.T.I) <br />2/11/2011<br />9<br />
DATA AND METHODS<br /><ul><li>Data received by means of R.T.I filed in March 2010, regarding the actions initiated by the implementing authorities against the establishments found violating the provisions of P.C-P.N.D.T act from March 2008-March 2010.
Data was collected for all the nine districts of Delhi.</li></ul>2/11/2011<br />10<br />
DATA AND METHODS<br />Data was divided into groups regarding:<br />Establishments found violating the provisions of the act,<br />Actions taken for various violations , <br />The status of the establishments at time of giving reply to R.T.I<br />Number of court cases filed in state of Delhi in the past 2 years (i.e. from March 2008-March 2010 under the P.C-P.N.D.T act <br />2/11/2011<br />11<br />
OBSERVATIONS<br /><ul><li>There were 404 establishments which were found violating the provisions of P.C-P.N.D.T act.
The penalties imposed were not according to the law/ Orders of Honorable Supreme Court /Gujarat High Court in Majority of cases
In many cases in which court case was to be filed ,only show cause notice was issued.
The Authorities are letting off the establishments sealed for improper record keeping by taking simple Penalty and affidavit.</li></ul>2/11/2011<br />29<br />
OBSERVATIONS<br /><ul><li>The Maximum no. of offenders were in North-West District of Delhi, while in the New Delhi District no establishment was found violating the provisions of P.C-P.N.D.T act
Court case has been filed in only 11 out of 404 establishments found violating the act.
Only show cause notice was given to 390 out of 404 establishments found violating the act </li></ul>2/11/2011<br />30<br />
RECOMMENDATIONS<br />The implementing authorities should be made accountable for sex ratios of their districts.<br />Awareness should be increased in the general masses regarding the rules Of Act.<br />The P.C-P.N.D.T act must be included in the syllabus of medical and related disciplines.<br />The media should be involved in all raids, so that no complaint can be swept under the carpet by the implementing authorities. <br />2/11/2011<br />31<br />
RECOMMENDATIONS<br />The National Inspection and Monitoring Committee should have a regulatory role over the legal actions being initiated against the clinics/establishments raided by them. <br />All the actions taken by the implementing authorities should be accessible to the civil society<br />2/11/2011<br />32<br />
REFERENCES<br />Guilmoto Christophe Z “Sex-ratio imbalance in Asia: Trends, consequences and policy responses” (www.unfpa.org/gender/docs/studies/summaries/regional_analysis.pdf)<br />Gorea R.K. “Editorial” JIAFM, 2004; 26(3). ISSN 0971-0973 (medind.nic.in/jal/t04/i3/jalt04i3p91.pdf)<br />Jones A “Case Study: Female Infanticide” (http://www.gendercide.org/case_infanticide.html)<br />“Violations Under The P.N.D.T Act And The Penalties” (http://pndt.gov.in/index1.asp?linkid=19)<br />2/11/2011<br />33<br />
Annual Report, 2006 (pndt.gov.in/writereaddata /mainlinkfile/File99.pdf)<br />OberoiRadhika “Here, Blue Still Wins Over Pink”, The Times of India,August 5th, 2008 (http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=4207)<br />Health department of Haryana “Implementation of PNDT Act – 1994 in Haryana” (http://haryanahealth.nic.in/menudesc.aspx?Page=2)<br /> Express News Service “Doctor convicted for violating PNDT Act” Wed Feb 04 2009<br />(http://www.indianexpress.com/news/doctor-convicted-for-violating-pndt-act/418997/)<br />2/11/2011<br />34<br />
Supreme Court Of India “Centre for Enquiry into Health And Allied themes [CHEHAT] & Ors Vs Union of India & Ors, Writ Petition [Civil] No. 301 Of 2000” order dated May 4, 2001<br />Times News Network , Lucknow Jul 14, 2010 “UP still not serious on PCPNDT Act” (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/UP-still-not-serious-on-PCPNDT-Act/articleshow/6164935.cms)<br />Five Month Activity Report Of National Support And Monitoring Cell from 15th May -14th October 06 (mohfw.nic.in/.../NSMC/NSMC%20Activity%20Report_May-Oct%2006.pdf) <br />2/11/2011<br />35<br />