MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |    

Termination of Pregnancy Beyond Statutory Limit of 24 Weeks Not Permissible, Even in Cases of Rape: Gujarat High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, in a detailed judgment, ruled against the termination of pregnancy in a case involving a 16-year-old rape victim, citing that the pregnancy had exceeded the statutory limit of 24 weeks, absence of fetal abnormalities, and no immediate threat to the life of the petitioner. The Court balanced the rights of the unborn child against the traumatic circumstances of the petitioner.

The petitioner, a minor rape victim, sought judicial direction for the termination of her pregnancy, which was at 26 weeks and 4 days of gestation. The petition was filed under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, with the victim having been raped by her uncle and neighbors. The application also requested DNA identification of the fetus tissues for ensuring justice.

On Termination of Pregnancy: The court, while empathizing with the victim's situation, noted that the pregnancy had crossed the statutory limit of 24 weeks as per the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act. The Medical Board's report indicated no substantial fetal abnormalities and no immediate threat to the life of the petitioner, leading the court to decide against the termination of pregnancy.

Regarding the Rights of the Unborn Child: Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar observed, "The unborn child has a right of protection from unlawful killing. Permitting termination of such a live fetus would equate to foeticide."

Reference to Supreme Court Decision: The judgment cited the Supreme Court's decision in X vs. Union of India & Another (2023 INSC 919), reinforcing the guidelines for termination of pregnancy.

Judicial Decision: The court, adhering to legal provisions and considering the medical report, denied the petition for termination of pregnancy. However, the court issued comprehensive directions for the victim's medical assistance.

Date of Decision: 07/03/2024

ABC VS STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

Similar News