Supreme Court directs Mumbai's JJ Hospital to terminate 30-week pregnancy of minor

The bench directed Mumbai’s JJ Hospital to perform the medical termination, while ensuring that all requisite medical safeguards are in place, reported news agency PTI. 

Pregnancy of minor ‘ex facie illegitimate’, SC focuses on reproductive choice

The court observed that it had considered the right of the minor to continue the pregnancy, which, on the face of it, was “illegitimate” as she herself is a minor and was facing the pregnancy due to an unfortunate situation arising from a relationship. It said the issue was not whether the relationship was consensual or the result of sexual assault.

“What has to be considered in the instant case is the right of the minor child to continue a pregnancy which is ex facie illegitimate, inasmuch as she is a minor and has to face this unfortunate situation owing to a relationship she had. The issue is not whether the relationship was consensual or whether it was a case of sexual assault. Ultimately, the fact is that the child to be born is not legitimate and, secondly, the mother-to-be does not want to bear the child,” the bench said, reported PTI. 

The top court took note of the medical board’s report stating that there was no threat to the life of either the mother or the child if the pregnancy were carried to full term.

“If the interest of the mother is to be taken note of, then her reproductive autonomy must be given sufficient emphasis. The court cannot compel any woman, much less a minor child, to complete her pregnancy if she is otherwise not intending to do so,” the bench said.

Courts must address abortion pleas to prevent unsafe practices, says Justice Nagarathna

During the hearing, Justice Nagarathna referred to the difficult moral and legal questions involved and observed that if courts do not address medical termination requests, people may turn to quacks and illegal medical establishments, which would be unsafe.

The court said that while the birth of a child ultimately results in a life, the decisive factor in the present case was the clear and consistent unwillingness of the minor to continue the pregnancy.

“It is also difficult for us, but there is no other way. Should we compel her to give birth to a child? Because the child that will be born is also ultimately going to be a life. There is another question—if she can terminate the pregnancy at 24 weeks, then why not at 30 weeks? Ultimately, she does not want to continue the pregnancy. The bottom line is that she does not want to give birth,” the bench observed, reported PTI. 

It added that it often takes time to decide whether to terminate a pregnancy. “There are many cases where termination takes place beyond what is stipulated under the MTP (Medical Termination of Pregnancy) Act, 1971, and doctors refuse to carry it out. Where will such people go? To quacks and unauthorised doctors. That will be dangerous,” it said.

Counsel appearing for the Maharashtra government submitted that, according to medical reports, even if the child were born at present, the baby would be alive, and one of the views taken by the high court was that the child could be given to an orphanage if the mother did not wish to keep it.

The top court said it would release the operative part of the order for the benefit of the hospital, and that a detailed order would follow.

(With PTI inputs)