Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Pooja Ganesh Jagtap And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 9 September, 2020

Author: Shrikant D. Kulkarni

Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala, Shrikant D. Kulkarni

                                                                          6121-20wp
                                        1


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD


                          WRIT PETITION NO. 6121 OF 2020


 Pooja w/o Ganesh Jagtap and anr.                          .. Petitioners

           Versus

 The State of Maharashtra and ors.                         .. Respondents

 Mr Y.B. Bolkar, Advocate for petitioners
 Mr S.N. Kendre, A.G.P. for respondents


                                     CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA AND
                                            SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.
                                     DATE     : 9th September 2020

 PER COURT:


1. The petitioner no.1 seeks permission to terminate the pregnancy.

2. Mr Bolkar, the learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that the private Doctors have recommended termination of pregnancy on the ground that the fetus would land up in sub-standard of life. The Doctors have pointed out the deficiencies and the disabilities, the fetus would suffer.

3. We had referred the petitioner no.1 to the expert committee constituted by the Dean, Government Medical College and Hospital, Aurangabad. The expert Committee examined petitioner no.1 and submitted the report. The relevant part of the report reads thus : ::: Uploaded on - 09/09/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2020 07:03:12 :::

6121-20wp 2 "12. Investigations done :
Sr.No. Investigations done Key findings
01. CBC, URINE ROUTINE WNL
02. USG Single live intrauterine gestation of 23 weeks with left renal agenesis/hypoplasia and echogenic focus in heart. Gastric bubble appears persistently small, however liquor appears adequate
13. Additional findings and observations : N.A.
14. Physical fitness for termination : Not applicable A. Yes B. No 15 -
16 Not recommended (if no, justification) : Taking into considerations above radiological finding, no substantial risk to fetus if born. Termination of pregnancy is not recommended.
17. Date and time : 08/09/2020 at 03 p.m."

4. The Committee has opined that taking into considerations the radiological finding, no substantial risk to the fetus if born. The Committee does not recommend termination of pregnancy.

5. In view of the report of the expert Committee, the permission to terminate the pregnancy cannot be granted.

6. Writ Petition is dismissed.

( SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J. ) ( S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ) vvr ::: Uploaded on - 09/09/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2020 07:03:12 :::