By PTI
NEW DELHI: In a significant order, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a woman cannot be denied an opportunity to terminate her pregnancy just because she is unmarried, reports said.
The court passed an ad-interim order to allow an unmarried woman to abort her pregnancy of 24 weeks arising out of a live-in relationship, subject to a medical board constituted by the AIIMS Delhi concluding that the foetus can be aborted without risk to the life of the woman, Live Law reports.
The court was reportedly hearing a plea by a 25-year-old unmarried woman, who questioned the Delhi High Court’s July 16 order declining her request to terminate her 24-week foetus in view of her consensual relationship.
A bench led by Justices DY Chandrachud observed that the Delhi High Court took an “unduly restrictive” view of the provisions of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Rules while declining the woman interim relief.
Noting that after the 2021 amendment, the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act uses the word “partner” instead of “husband” in the explanation to Section 3, the Court said that this shows the legislative intent to cover “unmarried woman” under the Act.
According to the PTI, the bench also comprising Justices Surya Kant, and AS Bopanna directed the AIIMS director to set up a medical board of two doctors to examine the woman by Friday under the provisions of the MTP Act. It asked the board to determine whether the pregnancy if terminated could risk the life of the woman or not.
“We request the AIIMS director to constitute a medical board in terms of provisions of section 3(2)(d) MTP Act by tomorrow (Friday). In the event the medical board concludes that the foetus can be aborted without any danger to the life of the petitioner (woman), the AIIMS shall carry out the abortion in terms of the petition,” the bench said.
The top court sought the report of the medical board within one week of the procedure and said that the order of the Delhi High Court stands modified to the above extent.
The top court said that the woman who was in a consensual relationship in the month of June had come to know about her pregnancy and during the examination, it was found that she was 22 weeks pregnant and she decided to terminate the pregnancy.
The Delhi high court had denied the permission to abort saying that it virtually amounts to killing the foetus.
In an order issued on July 16, a Delhi HC bench refused to grant permission to the woman to abort the 23-week foetus, saying it is not permitted under the abortion law after 20 weeks for pregnancy arising out of a consensual relationship.
The high court, however, sought the Centre’s response on the woman’s contention that the exclusion of unmarried women from being allowed to undergo medical termination of pregnancy up to 24 weeks, was discriminatory.
The petitioner, a 25-year-old woman, had told the court that her partner, with whom she was in a consensual relationship, had refused to marry her.
She had stressed that giving birth outside the wedlock would cause her psychological agony as well as social stigma and she was not mentally prepared to be a mother.
The high court, while dealing with the plea, had said the court cannot go beyond the statute while exercising its power under Article 226 of the Constitution.
ALSO READ | Govt notifies new rules for allowing abortion till 24 weeks of pregnancy for certain categories of women
“The petitioner, who is an unmarried woman and whose pregnancy arises out of a consensual relationship, is clearly not covered by any of the clauses under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003,” the high court noted in its order dated July 15.
“As of today, Rule 3B of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003 (which excludes unmarried women) stands, and this court, while exercising its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, cannot go beyond the statute,” it had said.
Before passing the order, the high court had suggested that the petitioner can be kept “somewhere safe” until she delivers the child who can subsequently be given up for adoption.
“We will ensure that the girl is kept somewhere safe and she can deliver and go. There is a big queue for adoption,” the court had said.
After the lawyer turned down the court’s suggestion, it said that it would pass an order on the petition.
NEW DELHI: In a significant order, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a woman cannot be denied an opportunity to terminate her pregnancy just because she is unmarried, reports said.
The court passed an ad-interim order to allow an unmarried woman to abort her pregnancy of 24 weeks arising out of a live-in relationship, subject to a medical board constituted by the AIIMS Delhi concluding that the foetus can be aborted without risk to the life of the woman, Live Law reports.
The court was reportedly hearing a plea by a 25-year-old unmarried woman, who questioned the Delhi High Court’s July 16 order declining her request to terminate her 24-week foetus in view of her consensual relationship.
A bench led by Justices DY Chandrachud observed that the Delhi High Court took an “unduly restrictive” view of the provisions of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Rules while declining the woman interim relief.
Noting that after the 2021 amendment, the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act uses the word “partner” instead of “husband” in the explanation to Section 3, the Court said that this shows the legislative intent to cover “unmarried woman” under the Act.
According to the PTI, the bench also comprising Justices Surya Kant, and AS Bopanna directed the AIIMS director to set up a medical board of two doctors to examine the woman by Friday under the provisions of the MTP Act. It asked the board to determine whether the pregnancy if terminated could risk the life of the woman or not.
“We request the AIIMS director to constitute a medical board in terms of provisions of section 3(2)(d) MTP Act by tomorrow (Friday). In the event the medical board concludes that the foetus can be aborted without any danger to the life of the petitioner (woman), the AIIMS shall carry out the abortion in terms of the petition,” the bench said.
The top court sought the report of the medical board within one week of the procedure and said that the order of the Delhi High Court stands modified to the above extent.
The top court said that the woman who was in a consensual relationship in the month of June had come to know about her pregnancy and during the examination, it was found that she was 22 weeks pregnant and she decided to terminate the pregnancy.
The Delhi high court had denied the permission to abort saying that it virtually amounts to killing the foetus.
In an order issued on July 16, a Delhi HC bench refused to grant permission to the woman to abort the 23-week foetus, saying it is not permitted under the abortion law after 20 weeks for pregnancy arising out of a consensual relationship.
The high court, however, sought the Centre’s response on the woman’s contention that the exclusion of unmarried women from being allowed to undergo medical termination of pregnancy up to 24 weeks, was discriminatory.
The petitioner, a 25-year-old woman, had told the court that her partner, with whom she was in a consensual relationship, had refused to marry her.
She had stressed that giving birth outside the wedlock would cause her psychological agony as well as social stigma and she was not mentally prepared to be a mother.
The high court, while dealing with the plea, had said the court cannot go beyond the statute while exercising its power under Article 226 of the Constitution.
ALSO READ | Govt notifies new rules for allowing abortion till 24 weeks of pregnancy for certain categories of women
“The petitioner, who is an unmarried woman and whose pregnancy arises out of a consensual relationship, is clearly not covered by any of the clauses under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003,” the high court noted in its order dated July 15.
“As of today, Rule 3B of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003 (which excludes unmarried women) stands, and this court, while exercising its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, cannot go beyond the statute,” it had said.
Before passing the order, the high court had suggested that the petitioner can be kept “somewhere safe” until she delivers the child who can subsequently be given up for adoption.
“We will ensure that the girl is kept somewhere safe and she can deliver and go. There is a big queue for adoption,” the court had said.
After the lawyer turned down the court’s suggestion, it said that it would pass an order on the petition.
