Sex Determination Not Mere Violation Of Law, Determines Value Of Female Life And Promotes Discrimination: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court while denying bail in a matter concerning the practice of sex determination of foetus has held that it not merely violates law but also determines the value of the female life and promotes discrimination in society.

The Court was considering a Bail Application seeking anticipatory bail in case registered under Sections 85, 316(2), 89 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The Bench of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma held, "The practice of determining the sex of a fetus and taking subsequent actions based on that information is not merely a violation of law, but each instance of such nature undermines at the value of female life and signals that some lives are deemed less worthy than others due to their gender. It fosters a culture in which girls are seen as burdens rather than equal members of the community, and endangers pregnant women by exposing them to unsafe medical procedures. Beyond the immediate family, such acts corrode social conscience, and strike at the hope of a society to be free from discrimination....."

The Applicant was represented by Advocate Ajay Kumar, while the Respondent was represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Naresh Kumar Chahar.

Facts of the Case

The deceased daughter of the Complainant was married and had two physically challenged daughters. It was alleged that his daughter had been subjected to continuous dowry harassment and mental cruelty by her husband and his family members. The Complainant contended that during her third pregnancy, the husband of his daughter had disclosed the gender of the unborn child, i.e. a girl child to the complainant, based on an illegal ultrasound allegedly conducted by accused along with his son. The deceased was thus operated upon, after which her condition had deteriorated and she eventually died.

It was stated that both the Accused persons are motor mechanics by profession, who, in addition to their regular occupation, had been running a side business of conducting illegal ultrasounds of pregnant women with the sole objective of determining the sex of the unborn child.

Counsel for the Applicant submitted that the Applicant had not been named in the present FIR and had been falsely implicated in the case at the instance of the main Accused, who was the husband of the deceased. It was contended that the Applicant had no direct role in the alleged illegal ultrasound or the subsequent events leading to the demise of the deceased. It was argued that the Applicant’s involvement was only alleged on the basis of statements made by third parties and that no independent evidence directly linked him to the commission of the offence.

Reasoning By Court

The Court at the outset noted that as per the Status Report filed and the investigation conducted by the Police, the Applicant and his son were actively working in tandem to carry out illegal ultrasounds, with the specific objective of determining the sex of the fetus, thereby facilitating a practice that is not only unlawful but also highly detrimental to societal interests. 

It also took note of the fact that the son of the Applicant, was impersonating as a doctor and actively conducted the illegal ultrasound of the deceased for the purpose of determining the sex of the fetus.

The Court deprecated the practice of determining the sex of the fetus and observed that if such practices are allowed to continue, it would send a message that human life has little value, and it is therefore necessary that the law intervene decisively to send a clear message that every life, regardless of gender, is entitled to protection and dignity.

The Court, while denying anticipatory bail to the accused persons, ordered, " Given the gravity of the offence and its societal consequences, it is essential that such acts are investigated thoroughly and dealt with firmly. The recovery of instruments used in the offence, custodial interrogation of the accused, and identification of other persons involved are necessary steps to prevent recurrence and ensure accountability. Any indulgence or leniency in such matters could embolden others to commit similar acts. Therefore, stern action is required not only to secure justice in the present case but also to protect the larger interests of society and safeguard the rights of every unborn female child and a woman carrying female feutus."

The Application was accordingly dismissed.

Cause Title: Bhupender Singh v. State NCT of Delhi

Appearances:

Applicant- Advocate Ajay Kumar

Respondent- Additional Public Prosecutor Naresh Kumar Chahar, Advocates Amisha Dahiya, Tushar Jaiswal and Priyanka Rani

Click here to read/ download Order