Back
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ
X – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
What is the extent of a woman's right to reproductive autonomy under Article 21 with respect to unmarried women seeking termination of pregnancy beyond 24 weeks? What is the appropriate interpretation of Section 3 and Rule 3B of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 and 2003 in relation to termination of pregnancy for unmarried women and changes in material circumstances? What are the permissible Court-directed remedies when medical boards recommend continuation of pregnancy beyond 24 weeks or when termination is denied, including adoption or state-facilitated delivery?
JUDGMENT
Mr. Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J.
Considering the nature of the case and the future prospects in the life of the young girl who is the petitioner before this Court, Registry is directed to conceal the identity of the petitioner and carry out appropriate steps to hide the details that would disclose or reveal her identity. For the facility of reference, the petitioner shall be referred to as 'X' and the case title be recorded as 'X' v. State of Punjab and others.
2. The present writ petition had been filed on 29.02.2024 for seeking directions to the doctors at Rajindra Hospital, Patiala, to carry out termination of pregnancy of the petitioner by constituting a Medical Board.
3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the petitioner whose date of birth is (dd/mm/yy) and aged about 18 years 7 months, met a boy around an year ago and they fell in love with each other. As a result of their growing proximity, they entered into physical relations with each other but both of them parted ways later. Petitioner is a student of 12th Standard and during her ongoing Board examinations, she felt pain in her abdomen for which she was diagnosed by the doctors of Rajindra Hospital, Patiala to be pre
The court affirmed that the right to reproductive autonomy under Article 21 applies equally to unmarried women, allowing them to seek termination of pregnancy under changing circumstances.
The court upheld the strict provisions of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, emphasizing consent and mental health while ultimately denying the termination due to associated risks.
The paramount duty to ensure the best interest and care for a child if born alive, as mandated by the MTP Act, Juvenile Justice Act, and constitutional provisions on the right to life and human digni....
The court reinforced the importance of maternal health and autonomy in pregnancy decisions, particularly regarding late-term terminations, while promoting adoption as a viable alternative.
The court permitted the termination of a minor's pregnancy beyond the statutory limit due to mental trauma and lack of fetal abnormalities, emphasizing judicial discretion in sensitive cases.
The court affirmed the right to reproductive autonomy under Article 21, allowing a minor victim of rape to terminate her pregnancy, emphasizing the importance of her consent and well-being.
The court emphasized the balance between a woman's autonomy in reproductive choices and the medical risks associated with advanced pregnancy, directing a re-examination by a different Medical Board.
The biological father's consent is not required for the adoption of a child born from sexual assault when the mother is a minor, prioritizing the child's welfare and the mother's status as the natura....
Termination of pregnancy beyond 24 weeks is permitted only for substantial foetal abnormalities or immediate health risks; in absence, proper medical care must be ensured.
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
