A.S. Bopanna JUDGMENT
R. Banumathi, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal arises out of judgment and order dated 29.06.2017 passed by the High Court of Orissa, Cuttack, in CRLMC No. 4845 of 2014 in and by which the High Court has quashed the summoning order issued against the Respondents and also the complaint filed against them Under Sections 23 and 25 of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (for short, "PC and PNDT Act")
3. Briefly stated case of the prosecution is that on 28.05.2014 at 11:00 a.m., a joint inspection was conducted by the State and District team, Dhenkanal, in Ultrasound Unit of Shri Jagannath Hospital. It was found that the Respondents had violated the provisions Under Sections 3(2), 5 and 29 of the PC and PNDT Act which is punishable Under Sections 23 and 25 of the said Act. For violation of PC and PNDT Act and Rule, the authorized officer of the Collector-cum-District Appropriate Authority, Dhenkanal, seized the ultrasound machine and other equipments from the said clinic. For such violation, the registration of ultrasound clinic of the Respondents has been suspended vide order of the Collector dated 18.06.2014. A complaint was filed against the Accused-Respondent Under Section 28(2) of the PC and PNDT Act. The Trial Court took cognizance of offences punishable Under Sections 3(2), 5, 29, 23 and 25 of the PC and PNDT Act and issued summons to the Respondents.
4. Aggrieved by the issuance of the summons, the Respondents filed the quash petition before the High Court Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the said proceedings initiated against them on the ground that (i) Inspection was conducted by the Tehsildar on 28.05.2014 without any authorisation/authority; (ii) The District Magistrate is an Appropriate Authority under the PC and PNDT Act and as per the Office Memorandum No. 19077/H of the Health and Family Welfare Department dated 27.07.2007, the District Magistrate cannot delegate its authority under the PC and PNDT Act and, therefore, the entire proceedings is not sustainable in law.
5. The High Court quashed the proceedings initiated against the Respondents on the ground........