Calcutta HC Slams CWC for 'Bad & Illegal' Declaration of Child as 'Abandoned' Despite DNA Proof; Quashes Adoption Order, Mandates Fresh Inquiry With Biological Parents' Hearing 'Constitutional Rights Cannot Be Eclipsed By Parental Authority': Allahabad High Court Slaps ₹25 Lakh Compensation On Father And State For Unlawful Confinement Of Adult Women Over Voluntary Religious Conversion Co-Operative Bank Not Obligated To Deduct TDS On Interest Paid To Non-Member Co-Operative Societies Under Section 194A(3)(v) Income Tax Act: Bombay High Court Mere Pendency Of Criminal Cases Not Sufficient Ground For Externment; It Is An Extraordinary Measure To Be Used Sparingly: Karnataka High Court Good Conduct And Strength Of Character Always Lie In The Choices One Makes: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge Of RPF Constables For Suppressing Criminal Antecedents 'Time Is Of Extreme Essence': Supreme Court Declines To Interfere With Public Procurement Tenders Over Belated Challenge And Laches "'Hanging Is Not Cruel, Torturous Or Degrading': Supreme Court Upholds Validity Of Execution By Hanging Under CrPC & BNSS" 'Backdoor Entry Cannot Be Regularized By Judicial Sympathy': Supreme Court Quashes Illegal Absorptions And Repudiates Political Machinations In Public Employment Custodial Interrogation Indispensable In Cross-Border Drug Cases Involving Commercial Quantities, Denies Pre-Arrest Bail: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'Cannot Take Advantage Of Your Own Wrong': Delhi High Court Rejects Husband's Plea For Divorce After Defying Restitution Decree Spousal Privacy Is Not Absolute: Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules Secretly Recorded Audio Evidence Admissible To Prove Adultery 'No Premium, No Risk': Supreme Court Strictly Enforces Section 64VB Insurance Act, Striking Down Retrospective Covers 'An Appeal Is Not Just A Statutory Right, It Is A Constitutional Right': Supreme Court Scraps High Court's Suo Motu Enhancement Of Life Sentence Sale With Condition To Repurchase Is Not A Mortgage: Gujarat High Court Tax Is On Use, Not On Wreckage: Kerala High Court Quashes ₹10 Lakh Demand, Rules Motor Vehicle Tax Cannot Be Levied On Accident-Wrecked Vehicles Not In Use Pecuniary Jurisdiction Objections Cannot Be Raised For The First Time In Execution Proceedings: Madras High Court 'Cannot Proceed Under SARFAESI If Dues Below ₹20 Lakhs': Punjab & Haryana High Court Protects Homeowners From Eviction, Issues Notice

A Woman Alone Has the Right Over Her Body: Gujarat High Court Permits Termination of Pregnancy for 19-Year-Old Rape Survivor

18 September 2024 2:51 PM

By: sayum


Court directs termination of 16-week pregnancy, emphasizing victim’s mental health and reproductive autonomy under the MTP Act. The Gujarat High Court, in a significant judgment dated May 17, 2024, allowed a 19-year-old rape survivor to terminate her 16-week pregnancy. Justice Nisha M. Thakore underscored the victim’s right to make decisions regarding her body, citing the critical importance of her mental and physical well-being. The decision aligns with recent interpretations of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, recognizing the reproductive rights of women, irrespective of marital status.

The petitioner, a 19-year-old woman residing in Ahmedabad, sought the court's intervention to terminate her pregnancy resulting from a rape incident. The petitioner, working in a call center to support her family, developed a relationship with an AMTS bus conductor, Mitesh Himmatbhai Thakor. Despite initial consent for engagement from both families, Thakor exploited the petitioner’s loneliness to establish a physical relationship against her will. When the petitioner informed Thakor about her pregnancy, he abandoned her and fled to his native place. The petitioner then lodged an FIR under Sections 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(n) of the IPC. Subsequently, she approached the court for permission to terminate the pregnancy.

Justice Thakore emphasized the victim's reproductive rights, quoting from recent Supreme Court rulings: "A woman alone has the right over her body and is the ultimate decision-maker on the question of whether she wants to undergo an abortion." The court noted that forcing a rape survivor to continue with the pregnancy would inflict further trauma and violate her constitutional rights.

The court highlighted the severe mental and physical health implications for the petitioner, observing that "continuation of the pregnancy would cause grave adverse effects not only on her mental but her physical health as well." The judge acknowledged the social stigma and financial instability that would exacerbate the petitioner’s challenges if forced to carry the pregnancy to term.

Justice Thakore referred to the MTP Act and relevant Supreme Court judgments, particularly focusing on Section 3(2)(b) of the Act, which allows termination of pregnancies up to 24 weeks for certain categories of women, including rape survivors. The court adopted a purposive interpretation, asserting the Act's aim to safeguard the reproductive autonomy and mental health of women.

The court took into account a detailed medical report from GMERS Medical College, confirming the petitioner’s pregnancy was 16 weeks and 2 days with no gross congenital fetal anomaly. The report deemed the petitioner fit for termination under the MTP Act, albeit with associated risks. The medical panel's recommendation and the petitioner’s consent were pivotal in the court’s decision.

Justice Thakore remarked, “The petitioner has expressed her free consent for termination of pregnancy, which appears to be without any fear or under any pressure. Her mother has similarly expressed and supported her decision.” This highlights the court's recognition of the petitioner’s autonomy and informed consent.

This judgment reaffirms the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the reproductive rights of women, especially in cases involving sexual violence. By permitting the termination of the petitioner's pregnancy, the Gujarat High Court has set a precedent that underscores the importance of mental health and the autonomy of women over their bodies. This decision is expected to influence future cases, reinforcing the legal framework that protects women’s rights to make reproductive choices.

Date of Decision: 17 May 2024

ABC vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.

Latest Legal News