Grounds Like Social Stigma & Economical Condition Are Not Included In Exceptions Under MTP Act: Bombay HC Denies Woman's Plea To Terminate 26 Weeks Pregnancy
|The Bombay High Court while denying a married woman's request to terminate her 26-week pregnancy.
The Court said that social stigma in society and economical condition are not exceptions where the outer limit of the length of the pregnancy is lifted under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971.
The bench of Justice A. S. Gadkari and Justice Dr. Neela Gokhale observed, “The main reason appears to be fear of social stigma in society coupled with her economical condition. In our view, the above grounds are not included in the exceptions where the outer limit of the length of the pregnancy is lifted under the Act."
Advocate Tejas Dande appeared for the Appellant and Advocate Purnima Awasthi appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
The Petitioner, the mother of a 4-year-old against whom currently divorce proceedings are pending, sought to terminate her 26-week pregnancy resulting from a consensual relationship, citing mental health, financial difficulties, and social stigma. The Court directed a Medical Board, and the report found no fetal abnormalities but highlighted risks due to the advanced pregnancy stage.
The Court said that the termination of pregnancies is governed by the MTP Act, and Section 3 of the Act stipulates certain conditions that must be satisfied before a pregnancy can be terminated.
The Court further noted that Section 3(2) of the Act allows termination of pregnancy beyond 24 weeks by a Registered Medical Practitioner if substantial foetal abnormalities are diagnosed by the Medical Board. As per the Court, the Medical Board can permit or deny such terminations, ensuring the safety of the procedure at that gestation age and assessing whether the foetal malformation poses a significant risk or potential physical or mental abnormalities.
The Court said that the grounds on which the women sought permission were not included in the exceptions where the outer limit of the length of the pregnancy is lifted under the Act.
The Court however observed, “want to express our anguish for the difficult circumstances in which women such as the Petitioner find themselves in, especially in the absence of any effective mechanism to ensure that the biological father shares equal pain, responsibility, societal reproach and social castigation, meted out to women in such cases.”
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Writ Petition.
Cause Title: X.Y.Z. v. Dean of Vitthal Sayanna Civil Hospital (Neutral Citation: 2024:BHC-AS:26617-DB)
Appearance:
Appellant: Adv. Tejas Dande, Adv. Trushna Shah, Adv. Bharat Gadhavi, Adv. Aniket Shitole and Adv. Trushna Shah
Respondent: Adv. Purnima Awasthi and AGP M. P. Thakur