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

2021 Supreme(Guj) 360

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.
A B C / Victim Thro Dineshbhai Gagubhai Rathod - Appellant
Versus
The State of Gujarat and Ors - Respondent
R/Special Criminal Application No. 5201 of 2021
Decided On : 11-06-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr PV Patadiya(5924)
For the Respondent: Mr DM Devnani, App

Point of Law: Rape - Termination of pregnancy - Right of privacy of petitioner, medical reports, and bearing in mind best interest principle, petition deserves to be allowed as prayed for only with a view to save and protect life of petitioner – victim.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 376(2)(j), 376(2)(n), 114, 506(2) - POCSO Act - Sections 4, 5(L), 5(q), 8, 9(L) - MTP Act, 2021 - Section 3 - Prayed for termination of pregnancy which is of 24 weeks as per report given by Doctor - victim was having pregnancy of 23 weeks and 2 days - Alleged that accused No.1 came into contact with complainant when she went for labour work at factory - Before about 5 months of lodging of the FIR, though complainant was minor, she was taken by accused No.1 inside a room of factory and committed rape on her for the first time and thereafter also he had committed rape for about five times. Moreover before about 4 months, accused No.2 son of owner of factory had also committed rape for first time after calling complainant inside office of factory and also threatened her to kill her and drive her out from job if she disclosed said incident to anyone. Thereafter, he had also committed rape for about four to five times on different occasions and complainant got pregnant and thereby both accused have, in connivance with each other.

Finding of the court: On perusal of Section 3 of the MPT Act, 2021, it is clear that that section allows abortion only if specific conditions are met with. Thus, from opinion given by penal doctors of G. G. Hospital, Jamnagar after medical examination of victim girl, it is revealed that the concerned doctors are of opinion that victim can undergo MTP with due risk of complications, few of them mentioned are haemorrhage, retained product of conception and infection. It is also stated that if MTP is considered then it should be performed without delay to avoid major complications and other adverse effects like negative impact on her mental, social, physical condition.

Result: Petition allowed.

ORDER :

1. Rule. Learned APP Mr. D. M. Devnani waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent – State.

2. Heard learned advocate Mr. P. V. Patadiya for the petitioner and learned APP Mr. D. M. Devnani for the respondent – State.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that FIR being C.R.No.11202002211297 of 2021 registered with City 'C' Division Police Station, Jamnagar for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(j), 376(2)(n), 114, 506(2) of IPC and Sections 4, 5(L), 5(q), 8, 9(L) of POCSO Act. It is mainly alleged that the accused No.1 viz. Deepak came into contact with the complainant when she went for labour work at the factory of Shri Rameshbhai Dangar. Before about 5 months of lodging of the FIR, though the complainant was minor, she was taken by the accused No.1 inside a room of the factory and committed rape on her for the first time and thereafter also he had committed rape for about five times. Moreover, before about 4 months, the accused No.2 viz. Piyush – son of owner of the factory had also committed rape for the first time after calling the complainant inside the office of the factory and also threatened her to kill her and drive her out from the job if she disclosed the said incident to anyone. Thereafter, he had also committed rape for about four to five times on different occasions and the complainant got pregnant and thereby both the accused have, in connivance with each other, committed the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(j), 376(2)(n), 114, 506(2) of IPC and Sections 4, 5(L), 5(q), 8, 9(L) of POCSO Act.

4. It is further submitted that the age of the petitioner victim – complainant is 17 years and 8 months.

4.1. At this stage, it is submitted that the victim – petitioner was found to be pregnant and therefore she informed her family members and during the course of medical treatment which was given on 31.05.2021, it was found that the victim was having pregnancy of 23 weeks and 2 days. It is submitted that the petitioner is a victim of rape case and her mental health coupled with the fact that bearing and rearing of a child in the womb would create a great mental agony to her for her entire life and may invite other social economical problems and, hence, the petitioner has expressed her willingness to terminate her pregnancy through her father. It is further submitted that the father of the victim has produced a consent letter on behalf of minor petitioner. Petitioner is also willing to terminate her pregnancy. Learned advocate has referred the consent letter of father of petitioner, copy of which is placed on record at page 34.

5. Learned advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the provision of Medical Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Act, 2021 (hereinafter referred to “MTP Act, 2021” for short) and submitted that in the said provision, it is specifically provided that where there is any pregnancy alleged by the pregnant woman to have been caused by rape, anguish cause by such pregnancy shall be presumed to constitute a grave injury to the mental health of the pregnant woman. Referring to the said provision, it is contended that the case of the petitioner – victim falls in such criteria and thus, appropriate direction may be issued.

6. Learned advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Ms. Z Vs. State of Bihar, reported in (2018) 11 SCC 572 as well as the judgment of this Court in case of Janak Ramsang Kanzariya (minor) through Manjuben Knazar Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr., reported in 2011 Cri.L.J. 1306. Relying upon the judgment of this Court, it is contended that in case of pregnancy of 12 weeks, permission was granted for termination of pregnancy. It is, therefore, urged that this petition be allowed and relief as prayed for be granted.

7. This Court has passed an interim order on 07.06.2021, which reads as under:

    1. This application is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in which the petitioner

      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