Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court Limitation | 1,142 Days of Silence: Orissa High Court Rejects Litigant's Claim That His Lawyer Never Called SC/ST Act's Bar on Anticipatory Bail Does Not Apply When Complaint Fails to Make Out Prima Facie Case: Karnataka High Court Oral Agreement for Sale Cannot Be Dismissed for Want of Stamp or Registration: Calcutta High Court Upholds Injunction Finance Company's Own Legal Manager Cannot Appoint Arbitrator — Award Passed by Such Arbitrator Is Non-Est and Inexecutable: Andhra Pradesh High Court District Court Cannot Remand Charity Commissioner's Order: Bombay High Court Division Bench Settles Conflicting Views Framing "Points For Determination" Not Always Mandatory For First Appellate Courts: Allahabad High Court Delhi HC Finds Rape Conviction Cannot Stand On Testimony Where Victim Showed 'Unnatural Concern' For Her Alleged Attacker Limitation in Partition Suit Cannot Be Decided Without Evidence: Karnataka High Court Cheque Dishonour Accused Can Probabilise Defence Without Entering Witness Box — Through Cross-Examination And Marked Documents Alone: Madras High Court Contributory Negligence | No Driving Licence and Three on a Motorcycle Cannot Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Rajasthan High Court LL.B Degree Cannot Be Ground to Deny Maintenance to Divorced Wife: Gujarat High Court Dried Leaves and Branches Are Not 'Ganja': Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under NDPS Act Family Court Judge Secretly Compared Handwriting Without Telling Wife, Then Punished Her Hesitation: Delhi High Court Quashes Divorce Decree Co-Owner Can Sell Undivided Share in Joint Property Without Consent of Other Co-owners — Sale Deed Valid to Extent of Transferor's Share: Orissa High Court Mandatory Safeguards of Section 42 NDPS Cannot Be Bypassed — Even When 1329 Kg of Hashish Is Seized: Gujarat High Court Affirms Acquittal GST Officer Froze Business Accounts Without Any Legal Basis, Ignored Taxpayer for Three Months: Bombay High Court Imposes Personal Costs Weapon Recovered, But No Forensic Report, No Independent Witness — Allahabad High Court Acquits Murder Accused

High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Medical Termination of Pregnancy on Grounds of Strained Relationship

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur dismissed a writ petition (WPC No. 2768 of 2023) seeking permission for medical termination of pregnancy. The petitioner, a married woman aged about 29 years, had approached the court requesting the termination of her pregnancy. However, the court, presided over by Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy, ruled that the grounds presented by the petitioner, which primarily involved strained relationship issues, did not fall under the permissible grounds specified in Section 3(2)(a)(b) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971.

The court noted that the petitioner had conceived from her husband, as acknowledged in the pleadings of the writ petition and supported by the marriage certificate enclosed as evidence. The judgment highlighted that the petitioner did not claim any sex crime committed against her without her consent or knowledge.

Referring to Section 3(2)(a)(b) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, the court emphasized that the continuation of the pregnancy could be terminated if there was a risk to the life of the pregnant woman or if there was a substantial risk that the child would be born with severe physical or mental abnormalities. The court further pointed out that strained relationships or issues arising in a marriage were not valid grounds for seeking permission for medical termination of pregnancy under the Act.

Justice P. Sam Koshy observed that allowing such petitions on the grounds presented in this case would undermine the purpose and objectives of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971. The judgment reaffirmed that in India, abortion is considered a crime, and medical practitioners are only authorized to perform abortions in situations where there is a serious risk to the life, physical health, or mental health of the pregnant woman, or if there is a substantial risk of severe deformities or diseases to the unborn child.

High  court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner failed to establish grounds that would warrant the grant of permission for medical termination of pregnancy. The judgment serves as a reminder of the limited circumstances under which abortion is permissible in India and the importance of adhering to the provisions outlined in the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971.

Date of Decision: 22/06/2023

Xyz Nil  vs State Of Chhattisgarh

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/XYZ-v.-State-of-Chhattisgarh-^0-Ors-22-June-231.pdf"]

Latest Legal News