AMITA R. PATEL & 1 Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 – Respondent(s)

Print
CR.MA/10158/2007 21/21 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 10158 of 2007
WITH
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 10160 of 2007
For Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
=========================================================
========================================================
AMITA R. PATEL & 1 – Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 – Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR JV MEHTA for Applicant(s) : 1 – 2.MS KRISHNA B MEHTA for Applicant(s) : 1 – 2.
MR M.R.MENGDEY, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2,
=========================================================
Date : 19/09/2008
ORAL JUDGMENT
1
Whether  Reporters  of  Local  Papers  may  be  allowed  to  see  the
judgment ? Yes
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? Yes
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? No
4 Whether  this  case  involves  a  substantial  question  of  law  as  to  the
interpretation  of  the  constitution  of  India,  1950  or  any  order  made
thereunder ? No
5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge? No
CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Page 1 of 13Gujarat High Court Case Information System
6/12/2011http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/showoj.jsp?side=R&casetype=CR.MA&caseno…
1. Rule. Mr.M.R.Mengdey, learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of
the respondent ? State.
2.  Criminal Misc.Application No.10158 of  2007 is  filed by the  petitioner-Doctor under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (‘Cr.P.C.’ for short)
to quash and set aside the complaint being Criminal Case No.3251 of 2006
pending  in  the  Court  of  learned  6th  JMFC,  Ahmedabad  (Rural)  for
contravention  of  Pre-Conception  and  Pre-natal  Diagnostic  Techniques
(Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 hereinafter referred to as (‘PNDT Act’
for short).
3. Criminal Misc.Application No.10160 of 2007 is also filed by the petitioner-Doctor under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash and set
aside the complaint being criminal case No.845 of 2006 pending in the Court
of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.9, Ahmedabad for contravention
of PNDT Act more particularly under Section 4(3), 5(1) of the said Act and
Rules 9(4) and 10(1)(A) framed under the said Act.
4. As common question of facts and law arise in both these application, they
are being disposed of by this common judgment.
Criminal Case No.3251 of 2006 is filed by the Dr.R.R.Vaidya, for and on
behalf of the Appropriate Authority under PNDT Act against the petitioner ?
Doctor  who  is  having  maternity  and  nursery  home  at  Chandlodiya,
Ahmedabad in the Court of learned 6th JMFC, Ahmedabad (Rural) alleging
inter-alia that he is functioning as Chief District Health Officer and he is
Page 2 of 13Gujarat High Court Case Information System
6/12/2011http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/showoj.jsp?side=R&casetype=CR.MA&caseno…
declared  Appropriate  Authority  under  the  PNDT  Act  vide  Government
Notification dated 07.02.1996 under Section 2(a) of the PNDT Act and Rules
framed thereunder. It is further alleged in the said complaint that in discharge
of his duty under the PNDT Act he found that accused has failed to observe
and comply with the provisions of the Act. It is alleged that on 21.02.2006
primary inspection of the clinic of the accused was undertaken by Dr.Shipla
Patel, Block Health Officer, City. The observations and reasons were recorded
by her and on 21.02.2006 the infirmity / lapses as observed by the Appropriate
Authority  was  communicated  to  the  accused  and  said  infirmity  /  lapses  are
produced at Annexure ? A to the said complaint. As the provisions of the Act
were violated, USG machine was sealed. That on 21.06.2006 a show cause
notice  was  issued  to  the  accused  as  to  why  the  registration  of  the  accused
should  not  be  suspended  /  cancelled.  That  the  accused  preferred  an  appeal
No.42 of 2006 before the State Appropriate Authority, Gandhinagar. That by
order dated 16.03.2006, Registration of the accused under the PNDT Act was
suspended. That the said complaint was filed on the following grounds:
?S1. Form-F is a statutory form and requires to be filled in completely &
send before 5th of the next month to the A.A. As per the provisions
of  the  Act/  Rules,  sending  of  the  Form  F  by  the  5th  of  the  next
month is mandatory.
2.  Authenticity  of  from/s  not  signed  by  the  accused  can  never  be
ascertained by any one & in such cases the entire form is useless.
This in turn flouts the requirement of filling up of form for every
patient  under  going  USG.  Accused  &/or  patient  can  disown  the
contents of the very same from in future to defy probable Medical
Termination  of  Pregnancy  ?  MTP  &  may  be  suggestive  of  the
possibility  of  the  accused  maneuvering  number  of  USG  done  &
equal number of forms filled up. The same can not be ruled out.
Page 3 of 13Gujarat High Court Case Information System
6/12/2011http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/showoj.jsp?side=R&casetype=CR.MA&caseno…
3. If signature of the doctor is missing on the forms, presumption can be
drawn  that  as  the  doctor  has  not  been  able  to  comply  the
declaration,  the  doctor  has  not  put  the  signature.  Otherwise
whenever  there  is  signature  put  by  the  doctor,  declaration  as
envisaged by the Act is accepted. In other words non-signing the
declaration  means  non-observance  of  the  same  i.e.  sex
determination  &  declaration  has  been  carried  out  &  is  in  total
derogation of the statutory provisions of the Act.
4.  Indication,  date  are  missing  in  the  forms.  Even  the  register  as
required  under  the  Act  was  also  not  maintained.  This  clearly
indicates  the  causal  approach  of  the  accused  towards  the
statutory provisions of the Act. Also reflect the lack of seriousness
with  which  the  Act  is  being  taken  up.  Resultant  effect  would
obviously  be  the  frustration  of  the Act  which  is  to  curtail  female
feticide.  This  in  turn,  will  keep  on  increasing  the  difference
between  the  male-female  birth  numbers.  In  other  words  the
endeavour  to  check  the  increasing  ratio  of  male  to  female  birth,
owing to the female child being killed before birth, would not be
getting through. In nut shell the Act is set as Naught.
5. The indication for the Pre-Natal Diagnosis as shown by the accused is
‘Routine  ANC’  even  routine  thing  is  also  with  a  specific  purpose
& the same is required to be mentioned otherwise data collection,
analysis of the same & consequent preventive measure to ensure
the  check  of  declining  number  of  the  female  birth  cannot  be
effected.??
5. That it was found that all the aforesaid breach and non-compliance were not
at all in the larger public interest. It was further observed in the said complaint
that not signing the report may be an attempt to disown such reports if pressed
to a corner & with a view to hide / suppress the activity not in consonance with
the provisions of the PNDT Act. It was alleged that penal provisions of Section
23 & Section 25 are attracted for contravention of Sections, 4,5 and 6 and
corresponding rules. Further it was requested to take cognizance of the offence
Page 4 of 13Gujarat High Court Case Information System
6/12/2011http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/showoj.jsp?side=R&casetype=CR.MA&caseno…
committed by the accused for non-compliance / breach of the provisions of the
Act & Rules and to punish the accused so as to restrict the contravention of the
provisions of the PNDT Act/ Rules and ensure the compliance thereof to meet
by the noble cause as envisaged by the PNDT Act. In the said complaint,
learned trial Court took cognizance and directed to register the complaint and
issued summons upon the accused. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
same,  the petitioners  of  CRMA  No.10158  of  2007  have  preferred present
application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash and set aside the said
complaint / criminal case.
6. Similarly one another complaint being Criminal Case No.845 of 2006 is
filed  by  one  Dr.P.L.Dave  Epidemic  Medical  Officer,  District  Panchayat,
Ahmedabad on behalf of the Appropriate Authority under the PNDT Act and
on behalf of Chief District Health Officer, Ahmedabad in the Court of learned
Metropolitan  Magistrate  Court  No.9,  Ahmedabad  against  the  petitioner  ?
accused. It is averred and alleged in the said complaint that complainant has
been  authorized  to  act  on  behalf  of  Chief  District  Health  Officer  who  is
declared  as  Appropriate  Authority  under  the  PNDT  Act  by  Government
Notification dated 09.11.2001. It is further alleged in the said complaint that in
the discharge of his duty under the Act, he has found that accused has failed to
observe / comply with the provisions of Sections 4(3), 5(1) and Rules 9(4) &
10(1)(A) of the Act framed thereunder. It is alleged that he visited clinic of the
accused  in  presence  of  two  respectable  witnesses  on  01.03.2006  and  on
discovering  the  contraventions  of  the  Act,  records,  search  and  seizure
procedure was conducted and the Sonography machine of the accused was
sealed. Panchnama  of  the search  and seizure  was prepared and  copy  was
handed over to the accused and same was produced along with the complaint.
Page 5 of 13Gujarat High Court Case Information System
6/12/2011http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/showoj.jsp?side=R&casetype=CR.MA&caseno…
It was found that Form ‘F’ bearing Sr.No. 1 to 25 ranging from 02.12.2005 to
28.02.2006 were not filed up properly and same were seized during the search
and seizure procedure. It was found that there was no sign of Doctor in Form
‘F’ in form numbers 3,4,5,6, 7, 11, 12. It was further found that patient’s name
was  not  written  in  the  declaration  by  the  patient  section  of  form  F.  No
indication for sonography is written in para No.11 of Form F in from Number
9,10 and 13. In all ?SF?? form number 14 to 25 the indication for Sonography
is shown in para 10 of Form ‘F’ as ?Sprevious child with congenital anomaly??
along with ?Sto rule out congenital anomaly and for foetal well being??. It is
further  averred  in  the  said  complaint  that  Section  4(3)  of  the  PNDT  Act
specifics duty on the registration holder or the Doctor conducting Sonography
at the hospital under the Act to record in writing the reason for conducting the
procedure and keep these records up to date in the clinic as per Rule 9(4). It is
further averred in the said complaint that as per Rule 10(1)(A) the Doctor and
the patient have to give a written declaration to be recorded in Form F; that in
no way the procedure being done is for selection or detection of sex of foetus.
Section 5 specifies a duty on the registration holder or the Doctor conducting
Sonography  at  the  Hospital  under  the  Act  to  obtain  written  consent  in  the
language which she understands. That in the said complaint Section 493), 5(1)
of the PNDT Act and Rule 9(4) and Rule 10(1A) are re-produced. Therefore, it
was requested to take cognizance of the offence committed by the accused for
non-compliance  of  the  mandatory  provisions  of  the  Act  and  Rules  framed
thereunder and thereafter, punish the accused so as to restrict the breach of the
provisions of the Act/ Rules and ensure the compliance thereof to meet by the
noble cause as envisaged by the PNDT Act. It is further alleged in the said
complaint that setting an example will go a long way in refraining the others
like the accused from violation of the provisions of the Act/Rules which in
turn  is  required  in  the  interest  of  maintaining  a  healthy  ratio  between  the
Page 6 of 13Gujarat High Court Case Information System
6/12/2011http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/showoj.jsp?side=R&casetype=CR.MA&caseno…
human  gender  of  Male  and  Female.  That  in  the  said  complaint  after  taking
cognizance the learned trial Court has issued summons upon the accused for
the offence under Sections 4(3), 5(1) of the PNDT Act and Rule 9(4) and 10
(1A) of the Rules framed thereunder. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
same,  the  accused  Dr.Ghanshaymsinh  Dabhi  has  preferred  present  CR.M.A.
10160 of 2007 under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash the said criminal case.
7.  Mr.Mehta,  learned  Advocate  appearing  on  behalf  of  the  respective
petitioners  has  vehemently  submitted  that  as  such  there  are  no  breaches
whatsoever much less technical one. It is further submitted that all the rules are
complied with more particularly the intimation to the patient that one should
not try to know sex of the foetus and various other precautions are also taken. It
is  further  submitted  that  inspite  of  the  fact  that  respective  petitioners  have
complied with all the provisions of the Act and Rules thereunder with mala-fide intention complaints have been filed by way of random survey and just to
show that inspection is done and the officers are carrying on their duties well.
Therefore, it is requested to quash and set aside the impugned complaint by
submitting  that  continuous  of  criminal  proceedings  against  the  petitioners
would be unnecessary harassment as the petitioners are reputed doctors with
good  morals  and  ethics.  Mr.Mehta,  learned  Advocate  for  the petitioners  has
submitted  that  with  respect  to  some  other  Doctors  against  whom  similar
complaints were filed, learned Single Judge of this Court has quashed and set
aside  such  criminal  complaints  by  order  dated  07.02.2007.  Therefore,  it  is
requested to quash the impugned complaints.
8.  Petitions  are  opposed  by  Mr.M.R.Mengdey,  learned  APP  appearing  on
behalf  of  the  respondent-State.  It  is  submitted  that  on  bare  reading  of  the
Page 7 of 13Gujarat High Court Case Information System
6/12/2011http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/showoj.jsp?side=R&casetype=CR.MA&caseno…
impugned  complaints  prima-facie  case  is  made  out  after  thorough
investigation by the Officers and what is required to be considered at this stage
is whether on bare reading of the complaints, prima-facie case is made out for
further trial or not. It is submitted that whether the petitioners have in fact
committed offence or not is required to be considered at the time of trial on
leading appropriate evidence. It is submitted that considering the lapses found
by the Appropriate Authority and the Officers under the PNDT Act and having
prima-facie found that petitioners violated the provisions of the PNDT Act and
Rules thereunder, impugned complaints have been filed with a view to punish
the accused persons. It is submitted that looking to the statement and object of
the Act and Rules thereunder prima-facie case is made out, therefore, it is
requested not to exercise discretion under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and quash
and  set  aside  the  complaint at  this  stage. It  is submitted that though  some
mala-fide are alleged, but same are without any basis and are absolutely vague.
It is further submitted that even otherwise as held by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court and this Court in catena of decisions solely on the ground of mala-fide
complaint cannot be quashed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. if it prima-facie
discloses  cognizable  offence.  Therefore,  it  is  requested  to  dismiss both  the
applications.
9. Heard the learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties.
10. At the outset it is required to be noted that denial to girl of her right to life
is one of the heinous violation of the right committed by the society; Gender
bias and deep-rooted prejudice and discrimination against the girl child and
preference of male child have led to large scale female foeticide in the last
decade. Decline of sex ratio of girls and women in India is a major concern for
Page 8 of 13Gujarat High Court Case Information System
6/12/2011http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/showoj.jsp?side=R&casetype=CR.MA&caseno…
all. In order to check female foeticide, the PNDT Act has been enacted. The
PNDT Act provides for (i) prohibition of the misuse of pre-natal diagnostic
techniques for determination of sex of foetus, leading to female foeticide; (ii)
prohibition of advertisement of pre-natal diagnostic techniques for detection or
determination  of sex; (iii) permission  and  regulation  of  the  use of pre-natal
diagnostic  techniques  for  the  purpose  of  detection  of  specific  genetic
abnormalities  or  disorders;  (iv)  permitting  the  use  of  such  techniques  only
under certain conditions by the registered institutions; and (v) punishment for
violation of the provisions of the proposed legislation. Section 3 of the PNDT
Act provides Regulation of Genetic Counselling Centres, Genetic Laboratories
and Genetic Clinics. Section 4 of the PNDT Act provides for Regulation of
Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques.  Under Section 4 of  the PNDT  Act certain
conditions are cast upon the person conducting Ultrasonography on pregnant
women.  Section  5  of  the  PNDT  Act  provides  Written  consent  of  pregnant
women and prohibition of communicating the sex of foetus. As per Section 6
of the PNDT Act on commencement of the Act, 1994 there is totally restriction
and ban on determination of sex of foetus. As per Section 6 of the PNDT Act,
no Genetic Counselling Centre or Genetic Laboratory or Genetic Clinic shall
conduct or cause to be conducted in its Centre, Laboratory or Clinic, pre-natal
diagnostic  techniques  including  ultrasonography,  for  the  purpose  of
determining the sex of foetus. As per Section 6(b) of the Act, no person shall
conduct or cause to be conducted any pre-natal diagnostic techniques including
ultrasonography  for  the  purpose  of  determining  the  sex  of  foetus.  As  per
Section 6(c), no person shall by whatever means, cause or allow to be caused
selection of sex before or after completion. To see that object and purpose of
the PNDT Act is achieved, Rules 1996 are framed. Under Section 32 of the
Act, Rule 3 provides for employees, the requirement of equipment etc., for a
Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic, Ultrasound
Page 9 of 13Gujarat High Court Case Information System
6/12/2011http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/showoj.jsp?side=R&casetype=CR.MA&caseno…
Clinic and Imaging Centre. Rule 3A provides for sale of ultrasound machines /
imaging  machines.  Rule  4  provides  Registration  of  Genetic  Counselling
Centre,  Genetic  Laboratory,  Genetic  Clinic,  Ultrasound  Clinic  and  Imaging
Centre.  Rule  9  cast  duty  on  every  Genetic  Counselling  Centre,  Genetic
Laboratory, Genetic Clinic, Ultrasound Clinic and Imaging Centre to maintain
a register  so  as to achieve ultimate  object  of  the  Act.  Rule 10 provides  for
conditions  for  conducting  pre-natal  diagnostic  procedures.  Section  10(1A)
casts  mandatory  duty  that  any  person  conducting  ultrasonography  /  image
scanning  on  a  pregnant  women  shall  give  a  declaration  on  each  report  on
ultrasonography  /  image  scanning  that  he  /  she  has  neither  detected  nor
disclosed the sex of foetus of the pregnant women to any body and even the
pregnant women before undergoing ultrasonography / image scanning declare
that she does not want to know the sec of her foetus. Thus maintenance and
preservation  of  records  and  conditions  for  conducting  pre-natal  diagnostic
procedures are absolutely mandatory in nature but they are to achieve goal and
object of PNDT Act and same is in larger public interest.
11. Now considering above provisions of the PNDT Act, and Rules framed
thereunder and object of the PNDT Act, present Criminal Misc.Applications
are required to be considered.
12. In the respective complaints / criminal case non-compliance and breach of
provisions of the Act and Rules framed thereunder are specifically mentioned
and same are on inspection by the Appropriate Authority and/or Officers under
the  Act.  Therefore,  prima-facie  averments  and  allegations  in  the  complaint
discloses cognizable offence and accused are to be tried. It cannot be said that
on bare reading of the impugned complaints, no case is made out for further
Page 10 of 13Gujarat High Court Case Information System
6/12/2011http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/showoj.jsp?side=R&casetype=CR.MA&caseno…
trial. Whether accused will be punished or not are required to be considered at
the time of trial and not at this stage considering Section 482 of the Criminal
Procedure Code.
13. As observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian Oil
Corporation v/s. NEPC India Ltd. and Ors reported in (2006) 6 SCC 736, a
criminal complaint in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.,
a complaint can be quashed where the allegations made in the complaint, even
if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima
facie constitute any offence or make out the case alleged against the accused.
For this purpose, the complaint has to be examined as a whole, but without
examining  the  merits  of  the  allegations.  Neither  a  detailed  inquiry  nor  a
meticulous  analysis  of  the  material  nor  an  assessment  of  the  reliability  or
genuineness of the allegations in the complaint is warranted while examining
prayer for quashing of a complaint. It is further observed and held that the
power to quash shall not, however, be used to stifle or scuttle a legitimate
prosecution. The power should be used sparingly and with abundant caution. In
the case of State of Orissa and Anr. V/s. Saroj Kumar Sahoo reported in
(2005) 13 SCC 540 while considering the nature, scope, purpose and exercise
of powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has
observed that inherent power is to be exercised sparingly and that too in the
rarest of rare cases. It is to be exercised ex debito justitiae, to do real and
substantial justice and not to stifle legitimate prosecution. It is further observed
in the said decision that though no hard and fast rule can be lad down as
regards cases where such power can be exercised, but the High Court being the
highest court of a State should normally refrain from giving decision in a case
in a case where the entire facts are incomplete and hazy, more so, when the
Page 11 of 13Gujarat High Court Case Information System
6/12/2011http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/showoj.jsp?side=R&casetype=CR.MA&caseno…
evidence has not been collected and produced before the Court and the issues
involved are of magnitude and cannot be seen in their true perspective without
sufficient material.
14.  In  the  complaint  it  is  provided  to  punish  the  accused  so  as  to  restrict  the
contravention  of  the  provisions  of  the  PNDT  Act/  Rules  and  ensure  the
compliance thereof to meet the noble cause as envisaged by the PNDT Act. It
was sought to be argued on behalf of the petitioners that alleged breaches are
technical one. It is true that it might be that alleged breaches may be seen to be
technical  one  but  provisions  of  the  Act  and  Rules  which  are  mandatory  are
required to be complied with strictly so as to achieve ultimate goal of the Act.
As  stated  hereinabove,  certain  duties  are  cast  upon  the  persons  conducting
ultrasonography / image scanning on a pregnant women so as to check female
fotecide.
15. In the facts and circumstances of the case and allegations in the complaint
narrated herein above and looking to the object of the Act, no case is made out
to  exercise  extra  ordinary  jurisdiction  under  Section  482  of  the  Criminal
Procedure Code to quash the impugned complaints at this stage. Now so far as
the  decision  of  the  learned  Single  Judge  of  this  Court  relied  by  the  learned
Advocate  for  the  petitioners  is  concerned,  it  is  reported  that  decision  of  the
learned  Single  Judge  of  this  Court  is  referred  to  Larger  Bench  and  Larger
Bench has already heard the matter. Even otherwise on facts, prima facie case
is  made  out  against  the  petitioners  and  therefore,  this  Court  is  of  the  opinion
that  considering  the  averments  and  allegations  in  the  complaint,  no  case  is
made  out  to  exercise powers  under  Section 482  of  the  Cr.P.C.  and  quash  the
complaint at this stage.
Page 12 of 13Gujarat High Court Case Information System
6/12/2011http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/showoj.jsp?side=R&casetype=CR.MA&caseno…
16. For the reasons stated above, both the applications fail, deserve to be
dismissed and accordingly they are dismissed. Rule discharged.
Before parting with the present judgment, this Court is tempted to observe and
this Court is of the opinion that moto of the Government and everybody is ?
SSAVE GIRL??. However, it shall not be only ‘SAVE GIRL’ but it should be
‘WELCOME GIRL (BETI VADHAO)’ and if this goal is achieved and every
man and women starts welcoming girl (Daughter) from the bottom of their
heart, then and then only it can be said that the purpose and object for which
PNDT Act has been enacted is achieved.
[M.R.Shah,J.]
satish
Top
Page 13 of 13Gujarat High Court Case Information System
6/12/2011http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/showoj.jsp?side=R&casetype=CR.MA&caseno…

Advertisements

Author: savedaughters19

This is a coverage of my struggles to save my daughters.I am thank full to my parents not only for Not killing me ,but also helping me save my daughters... My dream- A big shelter house for women who want to give birth to their daughters and raise them up with dignity and self respect , but have to fight their own families to do so. Will have medical facilities and facilities for legal aid. will have training centers for vocational courses so that they can stand up on their own two feet and stop the dependency on their husbands for finances, A child care center run and managed by the inmates, A kitchen and a vegetable farm run and managed by the inmates. At present only a dream.... But with grace of God will become a reality. God will show the way and means to achieve the dream.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s