Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 37768
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Harisankar V. Menon, J
Laila – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 19823 OF 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Akash S.
For the Respondents: P. Sreekumar, Vinay.V
Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) services cannot be denied to a couple solely on the grounds that one of the spouses has exceeded the prescribed age limit.
Headnote:The case involves the denial of Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) services to a couple due to the husband exceeding the prescribed age limit. The court analyzed whether statutory age limits for ART services can be applied strictly to deny treatment to a couple. The court found that benefits cannot be denied solely based on one spouse crossing the age limit. The primary issue was "whether the Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) services could be denied to the petitioners merely for the reason that the husband has crossed the prescribed age limit." The court relied on the ratio decidendi in Union of India v. Devayani S., which established that the benefit of ART services cannot be denied solely because one spouse has crossed the prescribed age limit. Therefore, this writ petition would stand disposed of, holding that the petitioners would also be entitled for the benefit of the principles laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in Devayani S. (supra).
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. eligibility for art services regardless of one spouse's age. (Para 1 , 2) |
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.06.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Additional Solicitor General of India for the 1st respondent and the learned Government Pleader for respondents 2 and 3.
2. The issue arising for consideration is as to whether the Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) services could be denied to the petitioners merely for the reason that the husband has crossed the prescribed age limit. The afore issue has been considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Union of India v. Devayani S. [2025 KHC OnLine 2473], wherein it was held that the benefit of ART services cannot be denied solely for the reason that one among the spouses has crossed the prescribed age limit. Therefore, this writ petition would stand disposed of, holding that the petitioners would also be entitled for the benefit of the principles laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in Devayani S. (supra).
