'Healthy And Viable Foetus': Delhi High Court Rejects 20-Yr-Old Unmarried Woman's Plea To Terminate 27 Weeks Pregnancy
The Delhi High Court has refused to permit a 20 year old unmarried woman, preparing for NEET Examination, to medically terminate her ongoing pregnancy of 27 weeks, observing that the foetus was healthy and viable.Justice Subramonium Prasad observed that the prayer for premature termination of pregnancy or delivery of the child could not be acceded to since the woman's case of did not fall...
The Delhi High Court has refused to permit a 20 year old unmarried woman, preparing for NEET Examination, to medically terminate her ongoing pregnancy of 27 weeks, observing that the foetus was healthy and viable.
Justice Subramonium Prasad observed that the prayer for premature termination of pregnancy or delivery of the child could not be acceded to since the woman's case of did not fall within the four corners of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act and the Rules framed therein.
The court perused the medical report and said that there was no congenital abnormality in the foetus nor was there any danger to the mother to carry on with the pregnancy which will mandate termination of the foetus.
“Since the foetus is viable and normal, and there is no danger to the Petitioner to carry on with the pregnancy, foeticide would neither be ethical nor legally permissible,” the court said.
It added that the woman would have to be induced for delivering the child and such delivery could be detrimental to the mental and physical health of the newborn since it would be a pre-term delivery.
Observing that it could also be detrimental to the mother for her future pregnancies, the court said:
“The Petitioner's case is also not covered by the guidelines dated 06.08.2018 on which the Petitioner places reliance. According to these guidelines relied upon by the Petitioner, medical termination of pregnancy even beyond 24 weeks is permitted only in cases of minor girls who are rape victims or when there are congenital abnormalities in the foetus. Since the present case does not fall under any of the categories, this Court is not inclined to accept the prayer of the Petitioner of foeticide.”
Dismissing the woman's plea, Justice Prasad said that it is always open for her to approach AIIMS for delivery and future course of action. The court said that AIIMS, being a premier institute, would render all facilities and advise her with regard to her pregnancy.
“If the Petitioner is inclined to give the new born child to adoption, then the Petitioner is at liberty to approach the Union of India and the Union of India is directed to ensure that the process of adoption takes place at the earliest and in a smooth fashion,” the court said.
Counsel for Petitioner: Dr. Amit Mishra, Advocate
Counsel for Respondents: Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, CGSC with Ms. Pinky Pawar, GP and Mr. Aakash Pathak, Advocate for UoI; Ms. Aditi Kapoor, Advocate for Ms. Mehak Nakra, ASC
Title: H v. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 563