Observing that sex-selection practices continue to persist in India, the Supreme Court today tressed that welfare legislation such as the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PCPNDT Act) must continue to be enforced strictly.

“It is true that in general terms, the declining sex ratio issue is better and has shown considerable improvement but, however, diluting the provisions of law, or letting infractions thereof slide cannot be countenanced”, the Court said.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra noted that while several indicators, such as sex ratio, have improved over the years, the country's progress remains incomplete and uneven. The Court observed that while much progress had been made since the enactment of the PCPNDT Act, much still remains to be achieved before concerns about the birth of a girl child become a thing of the past.

“Much progress has been made, and yet, much is left to be desired. In sum, while the situation is markedly better than it was in the mid-1990s, the data does not support complacency. The referred to above show that the progress made is incomplete and uneven. Consequently, the integrity and strict enforcement of welfare-oriented legislation such as the PCPNDT Act remain essential along with efforts continued and earnest, till the time there is a widespread change in mentality and what till now, is perceived as the 'inherent weakness' of the woman, is replaced by true equality, when there will dawn a realization that efforts such as these are no longer required. This is not to say that the laws protecting women within legislation such as IPC/BNS will no longer be required but at least, there will no longer be a question on whether a girl child deserves to be born”, the Court observed,

The Court made the observations while dismissing a Maharashtra doctor's plea against criminal proceedings initiated against him under the PCPNDT Act for alleged deficiencies in mandatory records maintained at his sonography centre.

The Court highlighted that while the National Family Health Survey-5 recorded an overall sex ratio of 1,020 females per 1,000 males, the sex ratio at birth stood at 929 females per 1,000 males. The Court also noted that several States continue to report sex ratios at birth below the national average, reflecting the continued presence of patriarchal preferences for male children and sex-selection practices.

The Court noted that census figures showed a fall from 945 girls per 1,000 boys in 1991 to 927 in 2001 and further to 919 in 2011. While recent data indicates a recovery, the Court said the improvement represented only a partial course correction.

“The recovery to 929 at birth signals a partial course correction, but yet, not a path of true equality and acceptability. Differences across State drive home this point. For example, Haryana and Punjab, which recorded child sex ratios below 900 in the years immediately after the turn of the century have demonstrated improvement in subsequent surveys showing the success of the regulations as enforced and the awareness measures being implemented. Nonetheless, several states still do report sex ratios at birth below the national average. This shows the continuing presence of deep-seated patriarchal preferences towards a male child and the 'behind the curtains' prevalence of sex selection practices”, the Court observed.

The Court noted that the sex ratio at birth improved from 896 females per 1,000 males during 2015-17 to 918 females per 1,000 males during 2022-24. “Although this represents some improvement compared to previous reports, it remains below the biologically expected level of around 950 or higher”, the Court emphasised.

The Court referred to the World Economic Forum's Global Gender Gap Report 2025, which recorded a fall in India's overall gender parity ranking from 129 to 131 among 148 countries.

The Court said that the country's improving numbers were the result of sustained efforts by governments and enforcement agencies over several decades. It referred to various Central and State government initiatives aimed at improving the status of the girl child and combating female foeticide, such as the Centre's Beti Bachao Beti Padhao scheme, Sukanya Samriddhi Yojana and Janani Suraksha Yojana, along with several State-level initiatives.

“We may only observe that more than seventy-five years after we have set out to chart our own path, even today seeing posters for education and upliftment, including financial security, of a girl child is not a sight out of the ordinary, in any town or city, including Delhi, where it is most often visible on the buses of the Delhi Transport Corporation”, the Court observed.

The Court said these schemes reflected continuing efforts to eradicate systemic bias against the girl child in an inherently patriarchal social structure, but the available data did not support any relaxation in enforcement of the PCPNDT Act.

In the present case, proceedings were initiated against the appellant doctor after authorities found alleged deficiencies in records maintained under the PCPNDT Act. A Judicial Magistrate First Class took cognisance of offences under Section 23 of the Act for alleged violations of Sections 4(3), 5, 6 and 29 and the relevant Rules. The Bombay High Court later declined to interfere with the prosecution.

Before the High Court, the doctor had contended that the Civil Surgeon who initiated the proceedings was not the competent “Appropriate Authority” under the Act and that the alleged errors and blanks in Form F were merely technical and inadvertent. Form F is the statutory record prescribed under the PCPNDT Rules for every prenatal diagnostic procedure and ultrasound examination. It records details relating to the patient, pregnancy, medical indications for the procedure and declarations regarding non-disclosure of the sex of the foetus.

The High Court rejected both submissions. It observed that the State Government by notification had designated the District Civil Surgeon as the Appropriate Authority. Further, it held that deficiencies in record maintenance were not a trivial matter, and compromises in maintaining the record apart from being a substantive offence under the proviso to Section 4(3), would also be offensive to the scope of the Act. The HC held that the extent and nature of the alleged violations would have to be examined during trial.

The Supreme Court noted that the legal position regarding maintenance of records under the PCPNDT Act was already settled. It referred to its earlier decision in Federation of Obstetrics & Gynaecological Societies of India v. Union of India, in which it was held that non-maintenance of records is not a mere clerical lapse, but a springboard for commission of offence of foeticide. It had held that proper records are often the only means by which authorities can ensure that diagnostic facilities are not being used for illegal sex determination.

Finding no reason to interfere with the orders passed by the Magistrate and the High Court, the Court dismissed the appeal.

Case no. – Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 9574 of 2018

Case Title – Dr. Ramesh v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 619