Medical Centres/Hospitals Cannot Insist On Registration Of Police Complaint As A Condition To Receive Medical Treatment: Bombay HC Directs Medical Aid For Pregnant Minor
The Bombay High Court directed hospitals to provide medical treatment to a pregnant minor stating that medical centres or hospitals cannot insist on registration of a police complaint as a condition to receive medical treatment.
The petitioner approached the Court seeking legal intervention to safeguard the legal rights and health interests of the petitioner's minor daughter who was 17 years and 4 months old and approximately seven months pregnant.
A Division Bench of Justice G. S. Kulkarni and Justice Firdosh P. Pooniwalla observed, “In our opinion, grant of medical aid to any person is a direct concomitant of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees right to life and livelihood which includes the protection of one’s health by making available appropriate medical aid. In a civilized society no person can be deprived of medical aid/treatment, much less in the present circumstances.”
Advocate Nigel Quraishy represented the petitioner, while GP P. H. Kantharia appeared for the respondents.
The petitioner's daughter, as per the petition, refused to disclose details about her pregnancy, stating that she was in a consensual relationship with another minor. Consequently, medical facilities denied treatment without a police complaint, prompting the petitioner to seek judicial relief under Article 226 of the Constitution, praying for her fundamental right to medical care under Article 21.
The Court held, “Merely for the reason that there is no police complaint, the petitioner’s daughter cannot be denied medical aid.”
The State conceded to providing medical treatment without disclosing the minor's identity but insisted on an 'Emergency Police Report' (EPR) as a formal statement from the petitioner.
“We find ourselves in agreement with the learned counsel for the petitioner that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it can never be that the petitioner’s daughter is deprived of any medical treatment from any hospital or medical centers and more particularly considering the age of the petitioner’s daughter, who in some months would be an adult of 18 years of age,” the Court remarked.
The Court held that an EPR could be submitted by the petitioner's advocate to the Government Pleader, to be kept sealed and utilized if necessary, stating that medical aid was concomitant to Article 21 and cannot be denied due to the absence of a police complaint.
The directives include:
- Submission of EPR by April 11, 2024.
- Confidential medical treatment at Sir J.J. Group of Hospitals without the insistence of a police complaint.
- Provision of pre- and post-maternity care.
- Admission and confidentiality at St. Catherine's Home along with pre-maternity medical aid and post-maternity care.
- Reservation of adoption issues for future consideration.
Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the petition.
Cause Title: XYZ v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:BHC-OS:5999-DB)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Nigel Quraishy and Dhananjay Deshmukh
Respondents: GP P. H. Kantharia; AGP Pooja Patil
