SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Bom) 164

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
S.S. SHINDE, S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.
“ABC” Through her Guardian – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Another – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 956 of 2018
Decided On : 02-02-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sujit A. Patil h/f. V.D. Salunke, Advocates
For the Respondents: A.B. Girase, Government Pleader

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code,1860 - section 376 - Code of Criminal Procedure came - Section 164 - Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 - Mentally tortured - Certificate issued - Seeking directions in nature of writ of mandamus - Contentions - Pregnancy is terminated - Petitioner on when victim went in morning to answer nature’s call outside house she did not return - Petitioner tried to search her - However he could not find her - Petitioner suspected that his son-in-law and his family who had grudge in mind must have kidnapped victim to pressurize petitioner for not filing any complaint - When petitioner could not find victim he lodged First Information Report in Police Station bearing under section 363 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code - After said crime was registered son-in-law of petitioner brought victim in police station on - At that time statement of victim was recorded wherein she did not allege any overt act on part of and she refused for any medical examination - On this count she was emanded in Child Rehabilitation Home at – Held, Therefore she will have to face to blame of society if she continues with pregnancy and even it would be difficult for her to continue with her education - Naturally therefore said pregnancy would cause huge trauma to victim - As petitioner victim is minor petition is filed by her father guardian - As she is minor as per sub-section (4) of section 3 of MTP Act consent in writing of her guardian is required to terminate pregnancy - However considering her age years on her request through her Counsel in order to know her wish when heard in Chamber she also disclosed that it is difficult for her to show her face to people in village and school due to pregnancy with which does not wish to continue - Expert committee conclusion also shows that risk of termination of pregnancy is within normal acceptable limits - In these for reasons discussed above we hold that there is no impediment in allowing petitioner – victim to terminate her pregnancy – Order Accordingly

JUDGMENT :

S.M. Gavhane, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of learned Counsels appearing for the respective parties.

2. The minor victim girl who is physically abused and mentally tortured has approached this Court through her father – the guardian for seeking directions in the nature of writ of mandamus, thereby directing to terminate her pregnancy by following the procedure as described under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 [hereinafter referred as to “the MTP Act”] and further directions to conduct DNA test of unborn foetus, so as to determine natural parents of it.

3. The guardian father of the victim contends that he has four daughters and one son. The victim is minor daughter aged about 16 years. She is studying in 10th standard. As per her bona fide certificate issued by the school, her date of birth is 05.01.2001. It is further contended that his elder daughter has married on 06.01.2013 with one Vikas Rathod and he is not maintaining his wife. Vikas drove his wife out of his house. Therefore, she is residing with the petitioner. Some complaints were filed against the matrimonial family members of elder daughter of the petitioner and therefore there was grudge in the mind of that family.

4. According to the petitioner on 27.11.2017 when victim went in the morning to answer the nature’s call outside the house, she did not return. The petitioner tried to search her. However, he could not find her. The petitioner suspected that his son-in-law Vikas and his family, who had grudge in the mind, must have kidnapped the victim to pressurize the petitioner for not filing any complaint. When the petitioner could not find the victim, he lodged the First Information Report in Kingaon Police Station bearing No.144 of 2017 on 30.11.2017 under section 363 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After the said crime was registered, the son-in-law of the petitioner brought the victim in the police station on 04.12.2017. At that time, statement of the victim was recorded wherein she did not allege any overt act on the part of Vikas and she refused for any medical examination. On this count, she was emanded in Child Rehabilitation Home at Latur. In the said Home, statement of the victim under section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure came to be recorded on 11.12.2017 by the PSI attached to Gandhi Chowk Police Station, Latur, in which she narrated the entire incident and made accusation against Vikas Rathod of committing rape by threatening her to her life, and against him and his father of inserting some substance in her mouth and of putting a handkerchief in her mouth. Thereafter, offence punishable under section 376 of the IPC was added in the above said crime.

5. The petitioner contends that after recording statement as above of the victim, she was referred on 20.12.2017 to the Government Hospital, Latur for medical examination. Upon medical examination, it was found that she is carrying two months’ pregnancy. Thereafter, the accused and his relatives threatened the complainant for dire consequences, if he does not take case back. Therefore, applications were submitted in the police station.

6. According to the petitioner, minor victim who was under constant mental and physical pressure of the accused, initially did not attribute any overt act against the accused. Only when she was in Child Rehabilitation Home, she has gathered courage and she narrated the incident. As such, firstly the victim was sexually assaulted and then she was pressurized for not giving any statement against the accused. Thus, the victim became pregnant due to heinous act committed by the accused person. Therefore, considering her age, her marital status, physical and mental condition and her education, it is desirable to terminate unwanted pregnancy in the light of provisions under subsection 2(b)(i) of section 3 of the MTP Act. It is contended that after getting knowledge of pregnancy of the victim, the

























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top