 |
|
UPSET: Nikita Mehta outside the high court yesterday. |
It is obvious that the court took into consideration the second report while announcing that Nikita could not abort her 25-week-old foetus.
Typo
"The word 'fair' was a typographical error. The second report produced yesterday clearly said there were least possible chances that the baby would be handicapped," said a source. However, another source said that there was clearly a change in opinion and not a typographical mistake and this sudden change was not really questioned.
But Public Prosecutor Dhairyasheel A Nalavade said, "We understand the mother's plight, but what was playing on my mind was that if the baby developed a handicap after birth, would one kill the child? It is difficult to take decisions on such issues. Abortion is like taking a life."
From the Mehtas' side, Dr Shakuntala Prabhu, Dr Snehal Kulkarni, Dr Sanjay Gupte and Dr Shyam Desai whose opinions were sought in this case had agreed that they would have considered abortion if they were in the petitioner's shoes.
Justice R M S Khandeparkar had observed that the petitioner's plea for an exception couldn't be given, as the law allows abortion only if the pregnancy risks the health of the mother. Khandeparkar said, "In order to revise the provisions in the ACT, you must raise it up in the legislature. This court cannot add new dimensions to this article. None of the doctor's reports confirm that the child will definitely suffer serious disabilities. Even if the petitioners approached the court before 20 weeks of pregnancy, the court couldn't direct medical doctors to conduct termination of pregnancy based on the medical opinion placed before it."
