IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J.
Xxx and Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
Union of India Rep, By It’s Secretary, Ministry Of Women And Child Development and Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) No. 16583 of 2024
Decided On : 04-05-2024
Medical Termination of Pregnancy - Reproductive Rights - Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, Section 3(2B) - Article 21 of the Constitution of India
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, a married couple, sought permission for the medical termination of pregnancy of the 1st petitioner due to substantial abnormalities of the foetus. The gestational age of the foetus was 27 weeks, and the petitioners approached the court after being informed that termination of pregnancy required court orders.
Finding of the Court:
The court considered the report of the Medical Board, which diagnosed substantial abnormalities in the foetus, and recognized the decisional autonomy of the 1st petitioner regarding her body and reproductive functions. The court granted permission for the termination of pregnancy, with conditions to ensure necessary medical assistance if the foetus is born alive.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners should be permitted to terminate the pregnancy due to substantial abnormalities of the foetus, considering the gestational age and the decisional autonomy of the 1st petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, specifically Section 3(2B), which allows termination of pregnancy if substantial foetal abnormalities are diagnosed by a medical board. The court also emphasized the reproductive rights and decisional autonomy of women, as recognized under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision: The court granted permission for the termination of pregnancy and outlined conditions for the procedure and post-birth care, emphasizing the responsibility of the petitioners for the well-being of the child.
The petitioners are a married couple. This writ petition has been filed seeking permission for medical termination of pregnancy of the 1st petitioner on the ground of substantial abnormalities of the foetus.
2. The petitioners were married on 20/5/2023. On 29/10/2023, the petitioners after conducting a medical examination found that the 1st petitioner was pregnant. Later, on scanning, certain abnormalities were found on the head and spine of the foetus. According to the petitioners, on subsequent medical consultation, certain substantial deformities and abnormalities were diagnosed in the head, spine and face of the foetus. Therefore, they decided to terminate the pregnancy and approached the 5th respondent hospital on 22/4/2024 and intimated their willingness to terminate the pregnancy. However, the 5th respondent informed that as the gestational age of the foetus was 25 weeks, termination of pregnancy can be done only after obtaining orders from the court. It is in these circumstances, that the petitioners have approached this court.
3. I have heard Sri.Sidharth O., the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.T.C.Krishna, the learned senior panel counsel appearing for the 1st respondent and Smt.Deepa Narayanan, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents 2 to 6.
4. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (for short, the MTP Act) deals with the termination of certain pregnancies by registered practitioners. The Act permits licenced medical professionals to perform abortions in specific predetermined situations as provided under the legislation – such as, when there is danger to the life or risk to the physical or mental health of the pregnant women, when pregnancy arises from sex crime or rape or intercourse with lunatic women etc., and when there is substantial risk that the child when born would suffer from deformities and diseases. The MTP Act was amended in 2021 to allow certain categories of women such as rape victims, minors, mentally ill women etc. to obtain abortions up to 24 weeks of gestation, raising it from the previous 20 weeks. On scrutiny of Section 3, with reference to sub-section (2), it is seen that medical termination of pregnancy can be permitted up to 24 weeks if the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman or grave injury to her physical or mental health. An exception is carved out by clause (2B) of subsection (2) of Section 3, as per which provisions of sub-section (2) relating to the length of pregnancy shall not apply to the termination of pregnancy if such termination is necessitated by the diagnosis of any substantial foetal abnormalities by a medical board. Thus, termination of pregnancy can be permitted even if gestational age of the foetus is more than 24 months, if the duly constituted Medical Board certifies that there is substantial foetal abnormalities.
5. The right of a woman or a girl to make autonomous decisions about her own body and reproductive functions is at the very core of her fundamental right to equality and privacy. Reproductive rights include the right to choose whether and when to have children, the right to choose the number of children and the right to access to safe and legal abortions. The constitutional right of women to make reproductive choices as a part of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India was firmly recognized by the Supreme Court in the landmark judgment in K.S.Puttaswamy v. Union of India [(2017) 10 SCC 1]. The Constitution Bench reiterated the position adopted by the three-judge Bench in Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Administration, [(2009) 9 SCC 1] which held that the right of a woman to have freedom to reproductive choice is an insegregable part of her personal liberty, as envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution and that she has sacrosanct right to her bodily integrity. Following Puttaswamy (supra), the three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court, recognizing the im
The judgment reaffirms the importance of reproductive rights and decisional autonomy of women, as well as the legal provisions under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, and Article 21 of ....
The court affirmed the right to terminate a pregnancy with substantial foetal abnormalities, emphasizing reproductive autonomy and health risks under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act.
The court reaffirmed the right to terminate a pregnancy based on substantial fetal abnormalities impacting health under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act.
The right to terminate a pregnancy beyond specified limits is upheld when substantial fetal abnormalities are confirmed.
The court affirmed the right to terminate pregnancy in cases of substantial foetal abnormalities, emphasizing the necessity of medical opinion in protecting the mother's health and reproductive choic....
The right to terminate a pregnancy with substantial abnormalities is upheld under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, emphasizing women's rights and health considerations.
The judgment affirms the fundamental right to reproductive autonomy, emphasizing that termination of pregnancy is permissible based on substantial foetal abnormalities regardless of gestational age.
Termination of pregnancy beyond 24 weeks is permissible under Section 3(2B) of the MTP Act when a medical board confirms substantial fetal abnormalities, as reproductive choice is a constitutionally ....
Recent amendments to the MTP Act, 1971 permit termination of pregnancy beyond 24 weeks in case of substantial foetal abnormalities, and the Court's decision is based on the interpretation of the MTP ....
The court affirmed the right to terminate a pregnancy with substantial foetal abnormalities, emphasizing the importance of medical opinion and reproductive autonomy under Article 21.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.