Supreme Court Restricts Police Authority to Register FIRs Under Anti-Sex Determination Law The Supreme Court has ruled that police officers cannot independently register First Information Reports (FIRs) or initiate investigations into violations under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PC & PNDT) Act. The bench, comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh, clarified that the designated Appropriate Authority under the legislation holds exclusive responsibility for handling complaints and conducting probes. The court emphasized that magistrates cannot accept chargesheets submitted directly by police officers under this law, reinforcing the statutory framework that limits judicial involvement to formal complaints from authorized entities or private individuals. The ruling addresses a longstanding procedural conflict between Sections 27 and 28 of the 1994 PC & PNDT Act, which aims to prevent female foeticide and regulate medical diagnostic practices. Section 27 classifies all offenses under the Act as cognizable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable, typically triggering standard police interventions. However, Section 28 imposes restrictions on judicial cognizance, requiring courts to act only upon a formal complaint filed by the Appropriate Authority, an authorized officer, or a private individual who provides a mandatory 15-day prior notice. This contradiction led to ambiguity in practice, prompting the court to resolve the statutory dilemma. The case reached the Supreme Court following a reference by the Allahabad High Court in The State of Uttar Pradesh v. Brij Pal Singh in September 2024. The reference sought clarity on whether police could register FIRs and submit chargesheets independently, despite the Act’s cognizable label.#supreme_court #allahabad_high_court #n_kotiswar_singh #pc_pndt_act #sanjay_karol
Supreme Court Rules Police Cannot Register FIRs for PC-PNDT Act Offences The Supreme Court of India has ruled that police authorities cannot register First Information Reports (FIRs) or act as the primary investigating body for offenses under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PC & PNDT Act). The bench, comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh, clarified that the Appropriate Authority established under the Act is solely responsible for investigating complaints related to violations of the law. Police may only assist in investigations when explicitly directed by the Appropriate Authority. The ruling emerged from a case referred to the Supreme Court by the Allahabad High Court, which had raised three key questions about the interplay between Sections 27 and 28 of the PC & PNDT Act. Section 27 designates all offenses under the Act as cognizable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable, while Section 28 mandates that no court can take cognizance of such offenses unless a complaint is filed by the Appropriate Authority, an authorized officer, or a person who has notified the Appropriate Authority of the alleged offense at least 15 days in advance. The Court addressed the first question: whether the cognizability of PC & PNDT Act offenses under Section 27 allows police to register FIRs and investigate cases. The justices concluded that the language of Sections 27 and 28, combined with the Act’s socially sensitive nature and the technical expertise required for investigations, precludes police from being the primary investigators. While FIRs can still be registered for unrelated general criminal offenses, the Court emphasized that the PC & PNDT Act’s procedural framework must be strictly followed.#allahabad_high_court #supreme_court_of_india #n_kotiswar_singh #sanjay_karol #pc_pndt_act
