Dr.Taruna Wife Of Shri Krishan Yadav v. State Of Haryana

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-1131 of 2017 .....

Date of decision:16.1.2017 Dr. Taruna

...Petitioner

v.

State of Haryana

...Respondent

....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate for the petitioner. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.468 dated 24.10.2016 registered for the offences under Sections 3, 3A, 3B, 4, 5, 18, 23, 25 and 29 of Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as `the PNDT Act') and Sections 420 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Mohindergarh, District Mohindergarh. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

From the record, I find that the main allegations are levelled against the present petitioner-Dr. Taruna, who conducted a deal with decoy patient Jyoti for conducting sex test of stillborn child for an amount of `25,000/-. As per the allegations in the FIR, she had taken the amount in her clinic in Charkhi Dadri, whose videography was conducted. Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.01.18 16:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-1131 of 2017 [2] Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, nature and gravity of the offences, I do not find it a fit case where the present petitioner is entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. Therefore, finding no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed.

January 16, 2017.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.01.18 16:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh