Section 32 Arbitration Act | Termination for Non-Payment of Fees Ends Arbitrator’s Mandate; Remedy Lies in Section 14(2): Supreme Court False Allegations of Dowry and Bigamy Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce Plaintiff Must Prove Her Own Title Before Seeking Demolition Of Defendant’s Pre-existing House: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mismatch Between Bullet and Recovered Gun Fatal to Prosecution: Calcutta High Court Acquits Man Convicted for Murder Where the Conduct of the Sole Eye-Witness Appears Unnatural and No Independent Witness Is Examined, Conviction Cannot Stand: Allahabad High Court Fraudulent Sale of Vehicle During Hire Purchase Renders Agreement Void: Gauhati High Court Upholds Decree for Refund of ₹4.90 Lakhs Unsigned Written Statement Can’t Silence a Defendant: Hyper-Technical Objections Must Yield to Substantive Justice: Delhi High Court Default Bail | No Accused, No Extension: Delhi High Court Rules Custody Extension Without Notice as Gross Illegality Under Article 21 Gratuity Can Be Withheld Post-Retirement for Proven Negligence Under Service Rules – Payment of Gratuity Act Does Not Override CDA Rules: Calcutta High Court Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction

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