Mental health risks of the petitioner justified the medical termination of pregnancy beyond the statutory limit, emphasizing the court's recognition of bodily autonomy.

ORDER :

1. Rule Nisi.

2. Both the sides are represented.

3. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 32 of the Constitution of India praying inter alia for issuing directions to the respondents to permit the medical termination of her on-going pregnancy under Section 3 (2)(b)(i) and Sections 3 (3) and 5 of the MTP Act¹[Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971] read with Rule 3B of the MTP Rules²[]Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003], in any Government hospital, preferably at AIIMS, New Delhi³[All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi] on a plea that she is neither physically, mentally, psychologically or financially prepared to continue with the unwanted pregnancy.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a married lady aged 27 years. She has two children (both sons, aged four years and one year respectively). The earlier deliveries of the petitioner were C-section deliveries and both she and her husband were satisfied that their family is complete. Her current pregnancy has come as an utter shock to the petitioner for the reason that she did not realise that she has an on-going pregnancy since she had adopted LAM⁴[Lactational Amenorrhea Method] which implies absence of menstruation due to continuing breast feeding as a contraceptive method after delivery of the second child.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner did not have any symptoms of pregnancy till very recently and immediately on the same being revealed by the Doctor, she has rushed to this Court and instituted the present petition. He further submits that the petitioner is a home maker and her husband is a graduate, working in a private company. The petitioner’s husband has the responsibility of supporting not only his own family, but also to maintain his aged parents and a sister with a paltry salary. It is, therefore unviable for the couple to feed one more mouth.

6. The petitioner has averred that she and her husband have approached several doctors and hospitals for medical termination of her pregnancy but the same has been declined due to the statutory bar imposed under the MTP Act that permits medical termination of pregnancy through a RMP⁵[Registered Medical Practitioner] upto 20 weeks and only in the case of a forced pregnancy, termination is permitted upto 24 weeks.

7. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on 05th October, 2023, notice was issued on the present petition and Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Additional Solicitor General was requested to enter appearance and accept notice on behalf of the respondent No.1-Union of India. In view of the urgent nature of the matter, it was deemed appropriate to obtain the opinion of a Medical Board directed to be constituted by AIIMS and the case was deferred for today to await the report.

8. We are informed today that the petitioner had appeared before the Medical Board, AIIMS on 06th October, 2023. The report dated 06th October, 2023 forwarded by the Medical Board, AIIMS states as under:

“Details of the woman seeking termination of pregnancy:

1. Name of the woman : X

2. Age : 27 years.

3. Registration/Case Number: UHID – 107060237.

4. Additional review done at AIIMS:

S.No. Investigations done Key finding

1 Ultrasound done at AIIMS on 20.09.2023 Ultrasonography suggest: Single live intra uterine fetus of 25 weeks 5 days POG. Estimated Fetal Weight – 886 gm. Placenta upper segment

5. Opinion by Medical Board for termination of pregnancy:

(a) Allowed (X)

(b) Denied (?)

Justification for