Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 59782
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Harisankar V. Menon, J
Faseela C. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 31028 OF 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: R. Sreehari, Hamza A.V.
For the Respondents: Pooja Surendran
Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) services cannot be denied to a couple solely on the basis that one of the spouses has exceeded the prescribed age limit.
Headnote:(A) Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) - Eligibility Criteria - Age Limit - Denial of services solely on the ground that one spouse has exceeded the prescribed age limit is impermissible. (Para 2)
Issues: 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.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.09.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Central Government Counsel 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).
