Sex selection practices persist behind the curtains due to preference for male child: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Thursday underscored the need for the strict enforcement of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PCPNDT Act) [Dr Ramesh vs State of Maharashtra].

A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra made the observation while dismissing a doctor's challenge to criminal proceedings initiated against him for alleged violations of the PCPNDT Act.

The Court observed that deep-rooted patriarchal preferences for male children and the continued prevalence of sex-selection practices leave no room for complacency in the fight against female foeticide.

It further stressed that welfare legislation, such as the PCPNDT Act, remains essential until societal attitudes towards women undergo a fundamental change.

The judgment authored by Justice Sanjay Karol opened with verses from poet Subhadra Kumari Chauhan's poem Balika Ka Parichay, which celebrates the joy of a mother at the birth of a daughter. Referring to the poem, the Court remarked that the objective of the PCPNDT Act is to ensure that every woman is able to experience that joy.

The Bench then turned to government data and welfare initiatives aimed at improving the status of the girl child. While acknowledging that India has made considerable progress since the mid-1990s, it cautioned that the gains remain uneven.

“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 judgment stated.

The Bench noted that while India's overall sex ratio improved from 991 females per 1,000 males in the National Family Health Survey/ NFHS-4 (2015-16) to 1,020 females per 1,000 males in NFHS-5 (2019-21), the sex ratio at birth remains significantly lower at 929 girls per 1,000 boys.

"On a global level though, unfortunately, the data does not present a positive outlook. The World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report 2025 records a drop in our(India's) ranking in terms of overall gender parity score from the previous year to 131 out of 148, from 129 the previous year," the Court pointed out.

Tracing the historical decline in the child sex ratio from 945 in 1991 to 919 in 2011, the Bench remarked that recent recovery only reflected a partial course correction and not a path of true equality and acceptability.

The Bench further observed that although States such as Haryana and Punjab have shown improvements following stricter enforcement measures and awareness campaigns, several States continue to report sex ratios at birth below the national average.

Schemes such as Beti Bachao Beti Padhao and Janani Suraksha Yojana reflect continued efforts to eradicate the systemic bias suffered by the girl child in an inherently patriarchal system, the Court added.

The Court was hearing an appeal filed by Dr Ramesh against a Bombay High Court judgment refusing to interfere with an order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class taking cognisance of offences under the PCPNDT Act.

The proceedings stemmed from an inspection of his sonography centre, during which authorities allegedly found deficiencies in mandatory Form F records and other violations of the Act.

After the Magistrate took cognisance of offences under the PCPNDT Act, the doctor's challenge was rejected by both the revisional court and the High Court.

The matter then reached the Supreme Court.

Before the Supreme Court, he argued that the District Civil Surgeon who initiated the action was not the competent authority under the Act and that the deficiencies found in Form F were merely technical and inadvertent errors.

The Court reiterated the importance of Form F records under the PCPNDT Act. Relying on its earlier decision in Federation of Obstetrics & Gynaecological Societies of India v. Union of India, it observed that the importance and essentiality of Form F to the proper functioning of the Act is no longer open to debate.

"The keeping of records is essential to the Act and its avowed purpose. 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," said the Court.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the doctor's appeal.

Advocate Rajiv Shankar Dwivedi represented the petitioner.

Advocate Aniruddha Pande represented the respondents.

[Read Judgment]