Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Directs Termination of Pregnancy for Rape Victim Beyond 24 Weeks: High Court of Karnataka Upholds Reproductive Rights

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


.In a notable decision, the High Court of Karnataka, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna, has allowed the termination of pregnancy for a rape victim who is beyond the 24-week gestational limit, emphasizing the mental health impact and socio-economic consequences for the victim.

The judgment revolves around the interpretation of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, particularly the provisions allowing termination beyond the gestational limit of 24 weeks in specific circumstances. The court delved into the Act's provisions, focusing on whether the continuation of the pregnancy would cause grave injury to the mental health of the rape victim.

The petitioner, a 21-year-old rape victim, had initially been denied termination of pregnancy at 24 weeks gestation, citing the Act's limitations. This decision was challenged in court, highlighting the psychological burden and diagnosed adjustment disorder faced by the petitioner.

Justice Nagaprasanna critically analyzed the provisions of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, and referenced landmark Supreme Court judgments in similar contexts. The court observed, "In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case at hand, it would be appropriate to quote the judgment of the Apex Court... wherein the Apex Court has held as follows: 'The High Court... should have... adhered to the statutory provision that when there is an allegation of rape, the pregnancy can be terminated.'"

The court stressed the importance of the victim's reproductive choice and mental health in cases of rape-induced pregnancy. It was noted that the Medical Board had focused solely on the Act's provisions without adequately considering the petitioner's fitness for termination and the psychological impact.

The High Court directed the Vani Vilas Hospital in Bengaluru to execute the medical termination of pregnancy, taking into account the petitioner's fitness for the procedure. The court also ordered DNA testing of the fetus and stated that if the child is born alive, the State should assume full responsibility for the child's welfare, as per the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. Additionally, the court directed the State to compensate the victim in accordance with the relevant government order.

Dated: 13th February 2024

XXX VS The State of Karnataka

Latest Legal News