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

2019 Supreme(All) 932

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD AT LUCKNOW BENCH
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, ALOK MATHUR, JJ.
K.M.X. - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Lucknow and others - Respondents
Miscellaneous Banch No. 19418 of 2019
Decided On : 19-07-2019

Advocates Appeared:
Surya Narayan Mishra, Adv., Hari Krishna Srivastava, Adv., J.N. Mathur (Amicus), Adv., Bulbul Godiyal, Adv., Abhinav N. Trivedi, Adv.

The best interests of the victim and the statutory provisions of the MTP Act, emphasizing the risk to the life and mental health of the pregnant woman, and the statutory presumption of grave injury to mental health in case of pregnancy caused by rape, guided the court's decision to permit the termination of the pregnancy.

Headnote:

PARENS PATRIAE - MINOR RAPE VICTIM - Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971, Section 3, Section 5 - The court exercised its jurisdiction as 'parens patriae' to safeguard the interest of a minor rape victim. The court considered the provisions of the MTP Act, emphasizing the risk to the life and mental health of the pregnant woman, and the statutory presumption of grave injury to mental health in case of pregnancy caused by rape. The court's decision was guided by the best interests of the victim, as mandated by the Supreme Court in the case of Suchita Srivastava, and the medical opinion on the feasibility of the pregnancy and the victim's social circumstances.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a minor rape victim, sought permission to terminate her pregnancy which was beyond the permissible limit under the MTP Act. The court ordered a medical examination and considered the medical report, the victim's statements, and the social circumstances.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the victim, a minor, was not mature physically or mentally to handle the stress of pregnancy and that continuation of pregnancy would cause mental trauma. The court concluded that termination of pregnancy would be in the best interest of the victim, considering the statutory provisions and the victim's social circumstances.

Issues: The issues involved the permission to terminate a pregnancy beyond the permissible limit under the MTP Act, considering the best interests of a minor rape victim and the statutory presumption of grave injury to mental health in case of pregnancy caused by rape.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was guided by the best interests of the victim, as mandated by the Supreme Court, and the medical opinion on the feasibility of the pregnancy and the victim's social circumstances. The court considered the provisions of the MTP Act, emphasizing the risk to the life and mental health of the pregnant woman, and the statutory presumption of grave injury to mental health in case of pregnancy caused by rape.

Final Decision: The court permitted the petitioner to terminate her pregnancy, considering the best interests of the victim and the statutory provisions of the MTP Act. The court also directed the medical university to provide all necessary medical facilities for the termination and subsequent treatment, free of charge, and rejected an application for impleadment by the accused.

JUDGMENT :

1. Before proceeding to consider the prayer made in this petition, we find it appropriate to extract para 35 of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suchita Srivastava and another vs. Chandigarh Administration, 2009 9 SCC 1.

"35. The doctrine of "parens patriae" has been evolved in common law and is applied in situations where the State must make decisions in order to protect the interests of those persons who are unable to take care of themselves. Traditionally this doctrine has been applied in cases involving the rights of minors and those persons who have been found to be mentally incapable of making informed decisions for themselves."

2. The facts presented and the submissions made before us in this case call upon us to exercise our jurisdiction as "parens patriae" to safeguard the interest of a rape victim, who is minor.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel, learned Government Advocate, Sri Abhinav N. Trivedi, learned counsel representing King George's Medical University, and Sri J.N. Mathur, and Ms. Bulbul Godiyal, learned Senior Advocates, who have graciously provided their assistance to the Court on our request.

4. On 16.07.2019, the Court passed the following order:-

"Having regard to the facts narrated in this petition, Registry is directed to register this case with changed cause title as 'Km.X Vs. State of U.P. and others'.

Under no circumstances identity of the petitioner shall be disclosed.

This petition filed by a minor (as per her date of birth recorded in the High School Certificate issued by Board of High School and Intermediate Education) narrates the distress, trauma and mental agony of a minor victim of rape and sexual abuse which she is under-going.

More disturbing fact which we notice in this case is that as per the First Information Report, this victim is presently subjected to undescribable agony, that too at the hands of a person more than the age of her father.

Perhaps, we cannot understand the anguish caused to the victim on account of about 21weeks' of her pregnancy caused by her physical violation.

The prayer made by the petitioner through her father in this petition is that appropriate direction may be issued allowing the petitioner to get her pregnancy terminated.

While considering the prayers made in this petition, we are conscious of the provisions contained in Section 3 of Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971 which permits termination of pregnancy only in case length of pregnancy does not exceed twenty weeks, that too, if continuance of such pregnancy, in the opinion of two registered medical practitioners, involves a risk to the life of the pregnant woman or there is substantial risk that if the child is born, it would suffer from such physical and mental abnormalities which may render the child seriously handicapped.

Having regard to the facts presented before us through this petition we, nonetheless, find it appropriate to get the petitioner examined by a Medical Board to be constituted by the Vice Chancellor of King Georges Medical, University, Lucknow.

We order accordingly.

The Medical Board to be constituted under this order shall comprise of 1. Head of the Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics or his/her nominee, 2. Head of the Department of Pediatrics or his/her nominee, 3. Head of the Department of Radio-diagnostics or his/her nominee and 4. A Psychologist/ Psychiatrist to be nominated by the head of the department of Psychiatry.

This panel or Medical Board will comprise of the aforesaid doctors from King Georges Medical, University itself.

We require the petitioner to be present in the Office of the Vice Chancellor of the King Georges Medical, University tomorrow i.e. 17.07.2019 at 10:00 am alongwith her parents. Once petitioner reports to the Vice Chancellor, she shall be examined by the aforementioned Medical B

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