The Delhi High Court, in a significant ruling today, allowed the termination of a 22-week pregnancy for a 27-year-old woman who had conceived while in a live-in relationship. The case, W.P.(C) 11206/2024, was presided over by Justice Sanjeev Narula. The petitioner, referred to as Mrs. C to protect her privacy, sought relief under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971, as amended in 2021, due to her precarious circumstances and the stigma associated with her situation.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, who was married in 2016 and has a 7-year-old daughter, was abandoned by her husband shortly after the birth of their child. Left to raise her daughter alone, Mrs. C entered a live-in relationship, which later resulted in an unintended pregnancy. Unaware of her condition until she was 21 weeks pregnant, Mrs. C attributed the late discovery to an irregular menstrual cycle, a condition she had been dealing with for some time. Given her financial struggles and the social stigma attached to her situation, she sought to terminate the pregnancy. However, she faced refusal from several medical institutions, which cited the legal limit for termination at 20 weeks as per the MTP Act.
Legal Issues Involved
The case centered around the interpretation of the MTP Act, specifically Sections 3(2)(b) and 3(3) and the MTP (Amendment) Rules, 2021. These provisions allow the termination of pregnancies up to 24 weeks in certain circumstances, including changes in a woman’s marital status. The petitioner argued that her situation, having been abandoned by her husband and later by her live-in partner, fell within the scope of “change in marital status” as per Rule 3B(c) of the amended rules.
Mrs. C’s counsel, Dr. Amit Mishra, along with Advocates Mr. Rahul Sharma, Mr. Shiven Mishra, and Mr. Ankit Srivastava, relied heavily on the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the MTP Act in the cases of X v. The Principal Secretary, Health & Family Welfare Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi and XYZ v. State of Gujarat. These rulings underscored the importance of considering a woman’s mental and physical health and her right to decisional autonomy when interpreting the Act.
Court’s Decision
Justice Narula, after careful consideration of the petitioner’s circumstances and the relevant legal precedents, ruled in favour of allowing the termination. The Court recognized that the petitioner’s abandonment by her husband and live-in partner, coupled with her financial instability, constituted a significant change in her material circumstances. The ruling emphasized that such changes, particularly when they adversely affect a woman’s ability to raise a child, should be considered valid grounds for terminating a pregnancy beyond the standard 20-week limit.
The Court also addressed the inadequacies in the medical report provided by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), which had failed to adequately assess the risks to the petitioner’s mental health. Justice Narula cited the Supreme Court’s guidance that the term “mental health” should be interpreted broadly, taking into account the social and environmental context of the woman.
Also Read
Case Details:
- Case Number: W.P.(C) 11206/2024
- Petitioner: Mrs. C
- Respondents: Principal Secretary Health and Family Welfare Department, Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
- Bench: Justice Sanjeev Narula
- Petitioner’s Advocates: Dr. Amit Mishra, Mr. Rahul Sharma, Mr. Shiven Mishra, and Mr. Ankit Srivastava
- Respondents’ Advocates: Ms. Mehak Nakra, ASC (Civil) for R-1, Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, CGSC with Ms. Pinky Pawar, G.P. with Mr. Aakash Pathak, Advocate for UOI, Mr. Satya Ranjan Swain, Panel Counsel, Mr. Kautilya Birat, and Mr. Ankush Kapoor, Advocates for R-3.
