1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.627 OF 2017

MAMTA VERMA

PETITIONER

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

Petitioner – Mamta Verma, aged 26 years, has

approached this Court under Article 32 of the

Constitution of India seeking directions to the

respondents to allow her to undergo medical termination

of her pregnancy. She apprehended danger to her life,

having discovered that her fetus was diagnosed with

Anencephaly, a defect that leaves foetal skull bones

unformed and is both untreatable and certain to cause the

infant’s death during or shortly after birth. This

condition is also known to endanger the mother’s life.

By order dated 04.08.2017, while issuing notice to

the respondents, this Court gave a direction for

examination of the petitioner by a Medical Board

consisting of the following Doctors of Sir J.J. Group of

Hospitals, Mumbai :

1.

HOD, Gynecology

2.

HOD, Neurology

3.

Dr. Anirudha Badade, MD, DMRD

4.

Dr. Deepak Ugra, MD (PAED)

Digitally signed by

SANJAY KUMAR

Date: 2017.08.09

17:10:30 IST

Reason:

Signature Not Verified

2

It is mentioned in the report dated 08.08.2017,

received from the Dean, Grant Govt. Medical College & Sir

J.J. Group of Hospital, Mumbai, that Dr. Anirudha Badade,

MD, DMRD, and Dr. Deepak Ugra, MD (PAED) are no more

associated with Sir J.J. Group of Hospitals, Mumbai.

Hence, HOD Padiatric and HOD Radiology were included in

Medical Board in their place and the following members of

the said hospital were present in the Board :

1)

Dr. Ashok Anand, Professor & HOD, Department of

Obstetrics and Gynecology

2)

Dr. Kamlesh Jagyashi, Professor & HOD, Department of

Neurology

3)

Dr. N.R. Sutay, Professor & Head, Department of

Pediatric

4)

Dr. Shilpa Domkundwar, Professor & Head, Department

of Radiology

The aforesaid Medical Board has examined the

petitioner and stated that as on 08.08.2017, she was into

her 25^th week and 1 day of pregnancy. The said Board has

further opined as follows :

“Patient wants pregnancy to be terminated as the

fetus is not likely to survive. It is causing

immense mental agony to her.

After going through the Ultrasonography reports,

Committee is of opinion that there is no point

to continue the pregnancy as fetus has

ANENCEPHALY which is non-compatible with life

and continuation of pregnancy shall pose severe

mental injury to her.”

3

We have been informed that the fetus is without a

skull and would, therefore, not be in a position to

survive. It is also submitted that the petitioner

understands that her fetus is abnormal and the risk of

fetal mortality is high. She also has the support of her

husband in her decision making.

Upon evaluation of the petitioner, the aforesaid

Medical Board has concluded that her current pregnancy is

of 25 weeks and 1 day. The condition of the fetus is not

compatible with life. The medical evidence clearly

suggests that there is no point in allowing the pregnancy

to run its full course since the fetus would not be able

to survive outside the uterus without a skull.

Importantly, it is reported that the continuation of

pregnancy can pose severe mental injury to the petitioner

and no additional risk to the petitioner's life is

involved if she is allowed to undergo termination of her

pregnancy.

In the circumstances, we consider it appropriate in

the interests of justice and particularly, to permit the

petitioner to undergo medical termination of her

pregnancy under the provisions of Medical Termination of

Pregnancy Act, 1971. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Solicitor

General appearing for the respondents, has not opposed

the petitioner's prayer on any ground, legal or medical.

We order accordingly.

4

The termination of pregnancy of the petitioner will

be performed by the Doctors of the hospital where she has

undergone medi