As per case facts, a radiologist was involved in a decoy operation concerning illegal sex-determination. The raiding team found discrepancies in record maintenance, though no direct sex determination was proven. ... Despite an initial police discharge, a complaint was filed by the District Appropriate Authority under the PCPNDT Act, leading to the appellant's summoning. The High Court dismissed his quashing petition. The question arose whether the search and seizure, authorized by a single member of the District Appropriate Authority instead of the collective body, rendered all subsequent proceedings and collected evidence illegal and void. Finally, the Supreme Court held that while the search itself was illegal, evidence gathered, if relevant and admissible, could still be considered for trial. Non-maintenance of mandatory records is a serious offense, and therefore, the criminal complaint against the appellant cannot be quashed at this stage, leaving all contentions on merits open for trial.