Kerala High Court
Abc vs The Union Of India on 25 August, 2020
Author: Anu Sivaraman
Bench: Anu Sivaraman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 3RD BHADRA, 1942
WP(C).No.17271 OF 2020(H)
PETITIONER:
ABC
BY ADVS.
SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR
SHRI. AKASH S.
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
MINISTRY OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT,
SASTHRI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110001.
2 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
MINISTRY OF CHILD WELFARE,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
3 THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES,
GENERAL HOSPITAL JUNCTION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695035.
4 THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION,
MEDICAL COLLEGE,KUMARAPURAM ROAD,
CHALAKUZHI,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695015.
5 THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER,
IDUKKI DISTRICT,
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER,
KUYILIMALA,IDUKKI-685603.
R1 BY SMT.MAHESWARY.G., CGC
R2 BY SMT.PRINCY XAVIER, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.08.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.17271 OF 2020
2
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
W.P.(C).No.17271 of 2020
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 25th day of August, 2020
JUDGMENT
1. This writ petition is filed seeking permission for conducting a medical termination of pregnancy. The petitioner, who is only 19 years old had conceived when she was only 18 years of age. It is submitted that the provisions of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 permits the termination of pregnancy only till the pregnancy has proceeded for 20 weeks. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the pregnancy has proceeded past 24 weeks and that orders of this Court are required for terminating the pregnancy.
2. By an interim order dated 21.8.2020, the fourth respondent was directed to constitute a Medical Board to examine the petitioner. A Medical Board was constituted and a report has been made available before this Court. After examining the petitioner, the Medical Board opined that there is a live gestation where the ultra sonogram suggested a pregnancy of 25 weeks and 4 months. The report states as follows:-
"As member of medical board constituted by PrincipaI, Medical College Kottayam, Dr.Lissiamma George,HOD Department of OBG as chairman, I Dr.P.G.SAJI, Additional Professor of Psychiatry, Government Medical College WP(C).No.17271 OF 2020 3 Kottayam have examined ABC , with other board members on 23/08/2020 at 12 pm. Interviewed Ms. ABC in person and informants xxx informed that request for the medical board examination followed an application they submitted for medical termination of pregnancy for ABC who is unmarried and pregnancy unwanted. No past history/no family history of psychiatric illness. Birth, early development normal. Younger of 2 siblings. Premorbidily well adjusted. In mental status examination, individual is cooperative and communicative. Worried about her pregnancy. Eyes tearful. No pervasive depressive features. No psychotic features. No cognitive function impairment. No perceptual abnormalities. She understands the situation and can take decisions for herself. Now her only stress is about the continuation of the pregnancy which she wants to get terminated at the earliest.
Continuation of pregnancy may act as a severe stress on the young student as she claims it resulted from relationship with a close relative. The adverse mental health consequences of continuation of pregnancy on the individual might be expected to be grave and unpredictable."
3. It is not in dispute that the pregnancy in question was an unwanted pregnancy and that the petitioner now seeks to terminate the pregnancy and does not intend to proceed with the same. The precedents on the point are that right to opt for a medical termination of pregnancy is a part of the right of choice of the pregnant woman and since the petitioner has clearly opted not to continue with the pregnancy, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case where permission be granted for carrying out the procedure even though the pregnancy is advanced beyond 24 weeks.
4. This writ petition is allowed by permitting 'ABC' to undergo medical WP(C).No.17271 OF 2020 4 termination of her pregnancy under the provisions of the MTP Act, 1971. The termination procedure will be performed at Sabine Hospital, Muvattupuzha and in accordance with the provisions of the MTP Act, 1971, its rules and all other attendant acts, rules and guidelines prescribed for the purpose. The procedure shall be supervised by the Medical Board that submitted its report before this Court and the Medical Board shall maintain a complete record of the procedure which is to be performed on the 'ABC' for termination of her pregnancy. There will be a further direction to the doctors preferring the procedure to take the tissue of the foetus for DNA identification and to preserve the same intact. If the child is born alive, despite the attempts at medical termination of the pregnancy, the doctors shall ensure that everything, which is reasonably possible and feasible in the circumstances and in contemplation of the law prescribed for the purpose, is offered to such child so that he/she develops into a healthy child. The petitioner shall be present before the Superintendent of Sabine Hospital, Muvattupuzha with a copy of this judgment on 27.8.2020 for the performance of the procedure. The hospital shall be informed in advance of the directions issued by this Court to enable them to make necessary arrangements. The petitioner's family shall meet the expenses of WP(C).No.17271 OF 2020 5 the.procedure.
It is made clear to the Registry of this court and all concerned that while issuing the certified copy of the judgment or otherwise, absolute privacy shall be maintained with respect to the identity of the petitioner and that of 'ABC'. So much so, it is directed that copy of the writ petition, affidavit, the documents annexed to it and the medical report shall not be issued to any third person to this writ petition without securing orders from this Court or the Judge concerned.
Sd/-
ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE SJ WP(C).No.17271 OF 2020 6 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE OBSTETRICAL ULTRASOUND SCAN CONDUCTED ON 10.08.2020 AT MUNDAKAYAM MEDICAL TRUST HOSPITAL.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUGMENT DATED 4.4.2020 IN WP(C)NO.TMP 9/2020 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 2 JUNE 2020 IN AD HOC NO.WP-LD-VC-24 OF 2020 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF MAHARASHTRA AND GOA.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL