Illegality In Search Doesn't Render Collected Evidence Invalid : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday (February 23) held that illegality in search for want of proper authorization cannot render the materials or evidence gathered during the search invalid.

“While the search may be illegal, the materials or evidence gathered or collected in the course of such search can still be acted or relied upon subject to the rule of relevancy and the test of admissibility.” observed a bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Ujjal Bhuyan.

The case arose from a raid conducted on September 17, 2015, following a complaint alleging illegal sex determination. Acting on the directions of the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chairperson of the District Appropriate Authority, a decoy operation was carried out, leading to allegations that Appellant-Dr. Naresh Kumar Garg conducted an ultrasound examination without maintaining statutory records, such as Form F, or obtaining the patient's signature.

While the appellant was later discharged in a police case arising from the same incident, the District Appropriate Authority filed a separate complaint under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PCPNDT Act). A Magistrate issued a summons in 2022, which the Punjab and Haryana High Court declined to quash, leading him to file an appeal before the Supreme Court.

Before the Supreme Court, the appellant contended that the entire search conducted was illegal for want of proper authorisation, rendering the collected evidence inadmissible. Partly accepting this contention, the judgment authored by Justice Bhuyan, relying on the constitution bench decision of Pooran Mal Vs. Director of Inspector (Investigation), (1974) 1 SCC 345 stated that “unless there is an express or necessarily implied prohibition in law, evidence obtained as a result of illegal search or seizure is not liable to be shut out.”

The court said that the evidence gathered or collected during the illegal search would not have an impact on the admissibility of the evidence, as the decision regarding the admissibility of such evidence rests with the court.

Therefore, the appeal was dismissed, keeping all questions regarding the reliability and admissibility of evidence open for consideration at trial.

Cause Title: DR. NARESH KUMAR GARG VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 186

Click here to download judgment

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajive Bhalla, Sr. Adv. Mr. Yajur Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Yash, Adv. Mr. Amijot Bir Singh, Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Tiwari, Adv. Ms. Gauri Bedi, Adv. Mr. Divyansh Misra, Adv. Ms. Neha Verma, Adv. Mr. Shubham Bhalla, AOR

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Neeraj, A.A.G. Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Ms. Jyotsna Vyas, Adv. Ms. Sabarni Som, Adv. Mr. Yash Tyagi, Adv. Ms. Amisha Dash, Adv. Mr. Eashwar, Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Adv. Mr Abhishek Kumar Suman, Adv. Mr Nikhil Kumar Chaubey, Adv.