PCPNDT Act Form F Non-Maintenance: Supreme Court Holds That Quashing Is Not Warranted at Section 482 Stage

Case Name: Dr. Naresh Kumar Garg v. State of Haryana & Ors.
Citation: 2026 INSC 176 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 5915 of 2025)
Date of Judgment/Order: 23 February 2026
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj Misra

Held: The Supreme Court held that PCPNDT Act Form F non-maintenance quashing cannot be granted at the threshold merely on disputed factual assertions, as once it prima facie appears that ultrasonography was conducted, questions relating to maintenance of statutory records, compliance with Form F requirements, and the nature of alleged violations under the PCPNDT Act and Rules are matters requiring evidentiary examination at trial and cannot be conclusively determined in proceedings under Section 482 CrPC.

Summary: The appellant, a radiologist, challenged the dismissal of his petition seeking quashing of a PCPNDT complaint and summoning order arising from a decoy operation in Gurugram, contending that the raid was illegally authorised by a single member of the District Appropriate Authority, that he had already been discharged in an FIR-based prosecution arising from the same incident, and that witnesses denied any disclosure of the foetal sex by him; the State opposed the challenge by emphasising the mandatory statutory scheme of the PCPNDT Act, particularly the obligation to maintain complete records including Form F, and asserted that the complaint was independently maintainable notwithstanding the earlier police discharge; the Supreme Court analysed the statutory framework, the object of the legislation, prior precedent on search authorisation, and the gravity of record-keeping violations, and concluded that the allegations raised mixed questions of law and fact which could not be adjudicated at the quashing stage.

Decision: The appeal was dismissed, the Supreme Court declined to quash the complaint and summoning order, held that the criminal proceedings under the PCPNDT Act must continue before the trial court, clarified that no opinion was expressed on the merits of the allegations, and left all factual and legal contentions of the parties open to be urged during trial.