PC&PNDT Act in the Digital Age | 17 Dec 2025

Source: TH 

Why in News? 

The fight against sex-selective abortion in India has moved online, where influencers and self-styled doctors circumvent the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PC&PNDT Act) by promoting unscientific gender-prediction myths to vast audiences. 

• The internalised bias for sons has renewed focus on gender bias, digital regulation, and reproductive rights. 

What is Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PC&PNDT Act)? 

• About: It was enacted in 1994 to address the issue of female foeticide and the declining child sex ratio resulting from the misuse of diagnostic technologies for sex selection. (India’s sex ratio as per 1991 Population Census - 929 females per 1,000 males).  
  • The Act was significantly amended in 2003 to strengthen its provisions, explicitly include pre-conception techniques, and prohibit sex selection more comprehensively. 
• Key Provisions: 
  • Prohibition of Sex Selection: Bans any procedure, technique, or test like ultrasound aimed at determining or selecting the sex of a foetus (Section 3A). 
  • Permitted Uses: 
  • Regulation of Facilities: Genetic counselling centres, laboratories, and clinics must register under the Act. Unregistered facilities are prohibited from conducting such procedures (Section 18). 
  • Advertisement Ban: Prohibits advertisements related to pre-conception or pre-natal sex determination (Section 22). 
  • Supervisory Bodies: Establishes the Central Supervisory Board, State Supervisory Boards, and Appropriate Authorities for implementation and monitoring. 
• 2003 Amendment: Extended coverage to pre-conception sex selection techniques. 
  • Explicitly included ultrasound and imaging technologies within the regulatory ambit. 
  • Empowered supervisory boards and authorities with greater enforcement powers, including search and seizure. 
• Offences and Penalties: Every offence under this Act shall be cognizable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable. 
  • Penalties include up to 3–5 years imprisonment and fines ranging from Rs 10,000 to Rs 100,000 or more, depending on the offence and whether it is a repeat violation.

What are the Reasons for Lax implementation of the PC&PNDT Act, 1994? 

• Collusion and No-complainant Dynamics: Sex selection continues due to shared incentives—families demand it, and providers supply it—making reporting rare and enforcement difficult without proactive intelligence and strong enforcement systems. 
• Inadequate Infrastructure: District/State Appropriate Authorities face staff shortages, limited budgets, and inadequate training, reducing inspections, follow-up, and case-building. 
• Low Conviction Rates: Conviction rates remain abysmally low (e.g., only 617 convictions in 25 years, as per a Parliamentary Committee report), with many states registering few or no cases.  
• Digital and Online Challenges: Conceived long ago, the Act is ill-equipped to tackle modern challenges, especially the indirect promotion of son preference via social media, where influencers, self-styled experts, and religious figures spread unscientific claims, rituals, and narratives to large online audiences. 
• Deep-Rooted Societal Demand: Persistent son preference, driven by patriarchal norms, cultural expectations, and economic factors, sustains demand for sex selection and encourages illegal circumvention of the law. 
• Professional Misconduct: Sex determination remains a highly lucrative illegal business, with practitioners using coded language, odd-hour scans, and portable machines to evade detection.

How can Implementation of the PC&PNDT Act, 1994 be Strengthened? 

• Strengthen Institutional Framework: Appoint dedicated Appropriate Authorities (e.g., Civil Surgeons, Medical Superintendents) and Appellate Authorities at state and district levels, with clear roles to ensure timely registrations, inspections, and appeals. 
• Leverage Technology: Mandate online submission of Form F (pre-test declarations) for real-time tracking and provide anonymous grievance redressal via helplines and dedicated websites to report illegal practices. 
• Addressing the Online Ecosystem: Legally require technology platforms (Google, Meta, Amazon, etc.) to proactively remove sex-selection content, while supporting credible health influencers to counter myths and promote the value of girls online. 
• Legal and Procedural Reforms: Establish fast-track courts for PC&PNDT cases to ensure swift convictions and deterrence, and expand the Act’s definition of advertisement to cover all indirect promotions and online sex-prediction services. 
• Awareness and Behavioral Change: Official reviews note that enforcement alone cannot stop sex selection without addressing deep-rooted son preference.  
  • They emphasize the need for sustained awareness, community engagement, and regulation of indirect promotion, especially via advertisements and digital/social media, where enforcement strategies need urgent updating.  

Conclusion 

The PC&PNDT Act’s main challenge is deep-rooted son preference, now amplified by digital platforms. Effective implementation requires modernizing the law for the online era, ensuring swift legal deterrence, and fostering societal change to value the girl child, shifting from clinic-based policing to an ecosystem approach.