In Brief
A radiologist faced sex-determination act proceedings after a sting operation authorized by a single District Appropriate Authority member rather than collectively. Though the search was illegal under statute, the Supreme Court held that the complaint may proceed. Evidence obtained through an illegal search is not automatically inadmissible; it must be tested on relevancy and admissibility at trial. Discharge in a prior police case does not bar separate complaint proceedings under the specialized welfare statute, which operates independently. The Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the complaint, leaving all evidentiary issues open for trial.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.