The Indian Express (Delhi Edition)
Foetus has right to live: SC rejects plea to abort 27-week pregnancy
THE SUPREME Court on Wednesday rejected a prayer to allow abortion of a 27-week pregnancy while observing that the foetus too has a right to live.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai, S V N Bhatti and Sandeep Mehta told the counsel appearing for the 20-year-old single woman that the pregnancy was in excess of seven months now and asked “what about the right of the child to survive? How do you address that?”.
The counsel told the court that the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act primarily laid stress on the rights of the mother and that she is in a very delicate state.
She “is under a severe traumatic condition. She is taking classes for the NEET exam. She can’t step outside. She cannot face the society at this stage,” he submitted. The petitioner had approached the SC after the Delhi High Court turned down her prayer on May 3.
The HC referred to a expert report by panel of doctors of All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) set up on its direction and said it “shows that there is no congenital abnormality in the foetus nor is there any danger to the mother to carry on with the pregnancy which will mandate termination of the foetus”.
It added that “since the foetus is viable and normal, and there is no danger to the petitioner to carry on with the pregnancy,foeticidewouldneitherbe ethical nor legally permissible”.
Last month, an SC bench presided by chief justice of india DY Chandrachud had allowed a 14-year-old minor rape victim to terminate her 27-28 week pregnancy terming it a “very, very exceptional case where we have to protect her”. The court, however, recalled the order two weeks later as her mother who initially was for the abortion, expressed doubts over the likely impact of the procedure on her daughter’s health and opted to have a normal delivery.
The CJI led bench also said that a “medical board, in forming its opinion on the termination of pregnancies must...also evaluate the physical and emotional wellbeing of the person in terms of the judgment”.