The Karnataka High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings in a female foeticide case, with Justice M Nagaprasanna stating such acts are a “moral blight and constitutional affront,” stressing strict action against those enabling illegal sex determination and foetus termination.
KARNATAKA: The Karnataka High Court recently declined to quash criminal proceedings alleging female foeticide against three individuals accused of assisting a couple to determine the sex of their foetus, which led to the termination of a female foetus.
Justice M Nagaprasanna remarked that female foeticide is more than a statutory offence; it is a moral scourge and an insult to the Constitution of India.
The Court said,
“This Court cannot be oblivious to the larger societal malaise that forms the backdrop of the present case. Female foeticide is not merely a statutory offence, it is a moral blight and a constitutional affront. The Apex Court has repeatedly underscored that leniency, at the threshold in such matters, risks rendering the law a dead letter and emboldening those who trade in gender discrimination under the cloak of medical expertise,”
ALSO READ: Legal Action Against Tamil YouTuber for ‘Gender Reveal Party’
The common order addressed petitions filed by two people alleged to have acted as agents who helped couples illegally ascertain foetal sex, and by a radiologist accused of participation in the scheme.
According to the prosecution, the couple already parents to two daughters approached the accused agents to find out the sex of the foetus. One agent reportedly wrote her name on the pregnant woman’s hand before the ultrasound, which the court said served as a signal to hospital staff and the radiologist that the scan was intended to disclose foetal sex. The sex information was then allegedly relayed to the couple by the other agent.
The two agents were charged under Section 4 (restrictions on locations where pregnancies can be terminated) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 and Section 91 (act done to prevent child from being born) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
ALSO READ: Allahabad High Court: “Denying Abortion to Rape Survivors Violates Human Dignity”
The radiologist was accused of complicity for submitting misleading paperwork for the ultrasound, thereby disclosing the foetus’ sex to the agents. He was booked under Section 23 (offences and penalties for doctors, medical practitioners, etc. for violating the Act) of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994.
In its February 21 order, the Court found sufficient prima facie material against all three petitioners to allow the criminal trial to proceed and refused to quash the proceedings.
“Interference at this stage under the guise of exercising inherent or extraordinary jurisdiction would amount to throttling a legitimate prosecution in its infancy. The truth or otherwise of the allegations, the degree of individual culpability and the veracity of evidence, are all matters that properly belong to the crucible of trial,” the Court said.
The petitioners were represented by Advocates Hemanth Kumar K and Shridhara K. Additional Special Public Prosecutor Advocate BN Jagadeesha appeared for the State and the District Health and Family Welfare Office.
Case Title: Sardamma & Ors v State of Karnataka & Ors and Dr Shashi SL v District Appropriate Authority, Ramanagara
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE