Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

A.I. DEMOCRATIC WOMEN ASSOCIATION AND ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR

Decided
16 March 1998
Judges listed
A.S. ANAND, S. RAJENDRA BABU, AJAY PRAKASH MISRA (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Disposed off

Citations

Official
[1998] 2 S.C.R. 272 · 1998 INSC 139

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

In this writ petition challenge is made to the use of the drug 'Quinacrine' as a method of female sterilisation. Following prayer is made:

p. 272, margin F

"(a) To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondent nos. 1 and 2 to initiate immediate steps to ban the use of Quinacrine in the form of pellets or otherwise as a method of sterilisation. (b) To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondent nos. I and 2 to initiate proceedings under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1945 against all those engaged in the importation and/or manufacture, transmission, sale and use of Quinacrine in the form of pellets or otherwise as a method of sterilisation. (c) To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondent nos. I and 2 to issue a notification under Section 26A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1945, banning the use of Quinacrine as a method of sterilisation."

pp. 272–273, margin F

Counter affidavit on behalf of respondent No.3 has been filed in court today through Ms. Kamini Jaiswal. The same is taken on record.

p. 273, margin B

An affidavit has been filed by Shri Ashwini Kumar working in the office of the Directorate General of Health Services as Joint Drugs Controller (India).

p. 273, margin C

Paragraph 3 of the affidavit reads thus: "I say that the respondent is taking necessary steps to invoke the provisions of Sections 10-A and 26-A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1945, to prohibit/ban the import, manufacture, sale and distribution of Quinacrine in Pellet form and for the use as a contraceptive. Draft Notifications have been prepared and have been submitted to the competent authority in the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare for approval, copies whereof are annexed hereto and marked as Annexure

p. 273, margin C

I and II."

p. 273, margin E

Along with the affidavit, copies of the proposed notifications have also been filed.

p. 273, margin E

In view of the stand taken by the Central Government that it is taking steps to ban the import, manufacture, sale and distribution of the drug "Quinacrine" for use as a method of non-surgical sterilization on woman, no further orders are required to be made in this writ petition and we, therefore, consign the writ petition to records as disposed of. T.N.A Petition disposed of.

p. 273, margin F