A woman who was raped and became pregnant as a result sought the Supreme Court’s permission to terminate her pregnancy, which was almost 28 weeks along. The law in India allows abortion only up to 20 weeks of gestation, unless there is a risk to the life of the mother or the fetus. The woman had filed a plea in the Gujarat High Court, but it was rejected. She then moved to the Supreme Court, which held a special sitting on Saturday to hear her urgent plea.
The Supreme Court convened a special session at 10.30 AM to deal with the urgent plea of a rape victim who wanted to abort her pregnancy.
The special session was presided over by Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan.
The woman’s lawyer, Shashank Singh, argued that the medical board had recommended the abortion of the pregnancy, as it posed a risk to the woman’s physical and mental health. However, the High Court did not grant her permission to terminate her pregnancy, citing legal and technical issues. The lawyer appealed to the Supreme Court to intervene and allow the woman to exercise her reproductive rights.
The woman had filed a petition in the High Court on August 7, seeking permission to abort her pregnancy, which was the result of rape. The next day, the High Court ordered a medical board to examine the woman and report on her pregnancy status. The medical board submitted its report on August 10, which favoured the termination of pregnancy.
However, the High Court did not act on the report and adjourned the matter to August 23, without giving any reason.
The High Court’s delay in deciding the woman’s plea for abortion shocked the Supreme Court, which held a special session to hear her case. Justice Nagarathna, who was part of the bench, questioned the High Court’s rationale for adjourning the matter for 12 days. She said that this would cause a lot of harm to the woman, who was already in an advanced stage of pregnancy. She expressed her dismay at the High Court’s indifference to the woman’s plight and urged it to act swiftly.
The Supreme Court was unhappy with the High Court’s order, which postponed the woman’s plea for abortion for 12 days. The bench noted that the High Court failed to realize that every day mattered in this case, as the woman was already 26 weeks pregnant. The law in India allows abortion only up to 20 weeks of gestation, unless there is a risk to the life of the mother or the fetus. The bench said that the High Court’s delay was strange and unacceptable, considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
The Supreme Court observed that the High Court wasted a lot of time between August 11 and August 23, when the medical board’s report was available. The report had suggested that the woman should be allowed to abort her pregnancy, as it was risky for her health. However, the High Court did not consider the report and instead dismissed the woman’s plea on August 17. The woman’s lawyer said that the High Court’s order of dismissal was not uploaded yet, which made it difficult to challenge it. The Supreme Court asked its Secretary General to contact the Gujarat High Court Registry and find out if the order was uploaded.
The Supreme Court was frustrated by the absence of the High Court’s order, which prevented it from proceeding with the woman’s plea for abortion. Justice Nagarathna said that they needed the order to review the High Court’s decision and to grant relief to the woman. She also criticized the High Court for its lack of urgency and sensitivity in dealing with such a serious matter. She said that the High Court should have treated the woman’s plea as a priority and not as a routine case. She apologized for making these remarks, but said that they were necessary.
The Supreme Court ordered a new medical examination of the woman, as her pregnancy was nearing 28 weeks. The woman was asked to appear before the hospital today and undergo another check-up. The medical report had to be submitted to the Supreme Court by tomorrow. The Supreme Court said that it would hear the matter again on Monday as the first item on its agenda.
Advocate Swati Ghildiyal, accepted notice on behalf of the State of Gujarat.
Case Details: XYZ v. State of Gujarat Diary No.- 33790 – 2023
live law https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-dismayed-at-gujarat-high-court-delaying-rape-victims-plea-for-abortion-says-valuable-time-lost-235591?infinitescroll=1
Name; Shreya Modanwal,vShambhunath Institute of Law,Jhalwa,Prayagraj, 3rd yr.student,intern under Legal Vidhiya
