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.

JUDGMENT :

Arun Dev Choudhury, J.

1. Heard Mr. B. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. D.J. Das, learned counsel, as well as Mr. B. Chakravarty, learned Central Government counsel, for the respondents.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India raises a challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 21(g) of the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021 (for short, the Act, 2021). The petitioners seek a direction to the respondent authorities to permit them to avail Assisted Reproductive Technology (for short, ART) services, notwithstanding their ineligibility under the impugned provision. Since the validity of a parliamentary enactment is assailed, the matter has been heard by this Division Bench.

3. The petitioners are a married couple who have been unable to conceive naturally. In 2020, they commenced medical consultations for an Assisted Reproductive procedure. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic interrupted their course of treatment.

4. Thereafter, the petitioners underwent an Assisted Reproductive Procedure at Pratiksha Hospital, which did not result in a successful outcome.

5. On 13.03.2024, the petitioners approached Indira IVF Hospital to avail ART services. However, the hospital declined to treat the petitioners on the ground that they did not meet the age-eligibility criteria prescribed under the Act, 2021.

6. The grievance of the petitioners is that the statutory prescription of an upper age limit under Section 21(g) violates their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India by foreclosing access to ART services despite their individual medical fitness and by disproportionately denying them reproductive autonomy.

7. For the sake of completeness, the statutory provision under challenge is quoted herein below.

21. General duties of assisted reproductive technology clinics and banks —The clinics and banks shall perform the following duties, namely:—

………………………………………………………………………….

(g) the clinics shall apply the assisted reproductive technology services,

(i) to a woman above the age of twenty-one years and below the age of fifty years;

(ii) to a man above the age of twenty-one years and below the age of fifty-five years;

8. The petitioners urged that the reproductive choice and aspiration to parenthood are integral to the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

9. It is contended that a rigid age-based exclusion fails to account for individual medical assessments and is, therefore, arbitrary and disproportionate, offending Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is also urged that since the petitioners had commenced treatment prior to the enactment of the Act, 2021, the subsequent statutory restriction ought not to be applied to them.

10. The respondents, on the other hand, contend that the Act, 2021 constitutes a comprehensive regulatory framework governing ART enacted to address ethical, medical, and societal concerns.

11. It is argued that the age limits are founded on scientific evidence relating to the maternal health risks, fetal outcomes, and child welfare, and that the Court must accord due deference to legislative policy in such matters.

12. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the materials available on record and have also heard the learned counsels for the parties.

13. There can be no serious dispute that the right to make reproductive choices forms part of