Back
MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA
Saswati Mohury – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, J.
1. The petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are married to each other and are keen to have a child through Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) as defined in The Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021. The petitioners underwent Intra-uterine Insemination (IUI) procedure and similar other procedures from 2010 onwards in specialist fertility clinics in Chennai, Odisha and Chattisgarh. The petitioners explored ART in 2019 after successive failures in conceiving a child through IUI. The petitioner no. 1 was advised to undergo In vitro Fertilization (IVF) in December, 2019 but was unable to continue with the IVF by reason of the lockdown from March, 2020. The petitioners visited a fertility centre in Howrah in April, 2022 and were advised to undergo certain medical procedures. In July, 2022, the petitioners were informed that petitioners were ineligible for undergoing ART as the petitioner no. 2 had crossed 55 years of age.
2. The present writ petition was filed in January, 2023 for declaration that section 21(g) of The Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021 is ultra-vires Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
3. Section
The court emphasized the need for legislative enactments to be founded on clear medical evidence and to prevent unjust operation of laws, especially in matters concerning reproductive choices and per....
The Assisted Reproductive Technology Act allows a woman to seek ART services independently of her husband's age, emphasizing individual eligibility over couple-based restrictions.
The court ruled that age restrictions in ART apply only when both partners are involved; a woman can proceed independently if eligible, regardless of her husband's age.
Point of Law : Impact of prescription of upper age limit on liberty of individuals is a matter which the National Board should bring to notice of Central Government, so as to effectuate a detailed di....
The age restrictions under Section 21(g) of the ART Act do not act as a bar to the continuation of reproductive treatment involving pre-existing cryopreserved embryos if the treatment was initiated w....
Age limits in Section 21(g) of ART Act upheld as constitutional, based on medical and reproductive considerations.
The court upheld the constitutionality of age restrictions in the Assisted Reproductive Technology Act, confirming that the age limits serve child welfare interests and do not violate the right to eq....
The age-based restrictions in ART services under the 2021 Act are constitutional, balancing reproductive rights with the health and welfare of mothers and children.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
