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

2022 Supreme(UK) 437

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.
`x` Represented By Her Father And Natural Guardian - Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (MS) No. 3105 of 2022
Decided On : 06-12-2022

Advocates appeared:
Snigdha Tiwari, Advocate, Abhijay Negi, Advocate, Abhishek Rana, Advocate, Suyash Pant, Advocate, J.S. Virk, Advocate

A woman's right to make reproductive choices is a dimension of 'personal liberty' under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Headnote:

Medical Termination of Pregnancy - Termination of Pregnancy - Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 - Section 3 - Section 3(2) - X Vs. Union of India (2017) 3 SCC 458, A. Vs. Union of India (2018) 14 SCC 75, Sarmishtha Chakrabortty v. Union of India (2018) 13 SCC 339, Murugan Nayakkar v. Union of India, 2007 SCC OnLine SC 1092, Suchita Srivastava Versus Chandigarh Administration (2009) 9 SCC 1, Meera Santosh Pal v. Union of India (2017) 3 SCC 462 - The court discussed the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, particularly Section 3(2), and referenced several cases where termination of pregnancy was allowed even after completion of 24 weeks due to grave risk to the life and health of the petitioner. The court emphasized a woman's right to make reproductive choices as a dimension of 'personal liberty' under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a victim of sexual assault aged about 13 years, sought a writ of Mandamus to terminate her pregnancy caused by an illegal act. The petitioner's father consented to the termination, and a medical board recommended the procedure due to the risks involved.

Finding of the Court:

The court allowed the medical termination of pregnancy, considering the victim's age, the trauma she experienced, and the potential danger to her physical and mental health. The court emphasized the social stigma and undesirable consequences for the victim and the unborn child.

Issues: The main issue was whether to allow the termination of pregnancy for a minor victim of sexual assault, considering the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 and relevant case law.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the victim's right to make reproductive choices as a dimension of 'personal liberty' under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the consideration of the victim's age, trauma, and potential risks to her health.

Final Decision: The court directed the medical board to proceed with the termination of pregnancy, ensuring complete informed consent and obtaining the father's declaration of consent.

JUDGMENT

Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J. - By filing this writ petition, a victim of sexual assault, aged about 13 years, has prayed for a direction, by issuing a writ of Mandamus, to Chief Medical Officer, Dehradun and Doon Medical Hospital, Dehradun through its Managing Director to terminate the pregnancy of the petitioner caused due to illegal act perpetuated upon her.

2. This writ petition has been filed through her father and natural guardian. He and victim girl appeared before this Court virtually. He has consented for medical termination of unwanted pregnancy, though a panel of doctors constituted by this Court as per order dated 05.12.2022, has stated that since termination of pregnancy at any stage entails various medical surgical complication including risk of operative delivery and anaesthetic complications and ICU admission and danger of life, so it can be attempted with complete informed consent.

3. It is not disputed at this stage that pregnancy of the victim girl, who is petitioner before us, has pregnancy of 25 weeks and 4 days. Sub section (2) of Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 provides for termination of pregnancy where the length of pregnancy exceeds 12 weeks but does not exceed 24 weeks can be done on the opinion of two registered medical practitioners.

4. In similar cases, several High Courts and Hon'ble Supreme Court have granted permission for termination of pregnancy even after completion of 24 weeks of pregnancy. We take note of the following cases:

i. In X Vs. Union of India (2017) 3 SCC 458, after 24 weeks of pregnancy as the pregnancy involves grave risk to the life of the petitioner and possible grave injury to her physical and mental health, medical termination was allowed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

ii. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in A. Vs. Union of India, (2018) 14 SCC 75, has permitted termination in a case where the gestational age was 25-26 weeks, and in Sarmishtha Chakrabortty v. Union of India, (2018) 13 SCC 339, the Hon'ble Supreme Court permitted termination of the pregnancy when the gestational age was 26 weeks.

iii. In Murugan Nayakkar v. Union of India, 2007 SCC OnLine SC 1092, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has allowed medical termination of pregnancy beyond the statutory outer limit prescribed in the Act considering the fact that the victim was 13 years old and in trauma, even though the Board stated that termination will have equal danger for the mother.

iv. In Suchita Srivastava Versus Chandigarh Administration, (2009) 9 SCC 1 and in Meera Santosh Pal v. Union of India, (2017) 3 SCC 462, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that a woman's right to make reproductive choices is also a dimension of 'personal liberty' as understood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In Meera Santosh Pal (Supra), the pregnancy was into the 24th weeks. The Hon'ble Supreme Court permitted the petitioner to terminate the pregnancy and observed that the overriding consideration is that she has a right to take all such steps as necessary to preserve her own life against the avoidable danger to it.

5. This Court in the case of X through her father Vs. State of Uttarakhand, 2022 SCC Online Utt 61 has allowed the termination of pregnancy of 25 weeks of 16 year old girl by the team of experts. The Delhi High Court, today, in a case reported in livelaw has allowed termination of pregnancy of 33 weeks of a 26 year old woman.

6. Having given our anxious consideration to the facts of the case, the different judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Courts, we are of the opinion that in this case, we should allow the Medical Board, which has already been constituted to proceed with medical termination of pregnancy of the victim girl, if there is no danger to the life of victim girl. The medical termination of pregnancy should be carried out under the guidance of Dr. Chitra Joshi, HOD, OBGY, GDMC, Dehradun and during the medical procedure, if they find any risk or danger to the life of the victim girl,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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