Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
A woman’s decision in whether or not to go ahead with the termination of her pregnancy is a decision that is to be taken by no one but herself. This is primarily based on the widely acknowledged idea of bodily autonomy. Here, her consent reigns supreme.”
“Such decisions are tough, however, life is not just about being able to breathe rather it is about being able to live with dignity. Where the denial of dignity and social as well as family acceptance or approval ‘is a writing’ on the wall, it compounds agony of the child and leads to greater injustice.”
“The right of a woman or a girl to make autonomous decisions about her own body and reproductive functions is at the very core of her fundamental right to equality and privacy”
by Siddharth R. Gupta* and Prakruthi N.**
Cite as: 2024 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 20
In the case of sexual assault, denying a woman right to say no to medical termination of pregnancy and fasten her with responsibility of motherhood would amount to denying her human right to live with dignity as she has a right in relation to her body which includes saying Yes or No to being a mother.
Bombay High Court upheld the petitioner's right to choose termination of pregnancy. ‘The Court considers this petition as an appeal not only to the judicial mind, but to the moral conscience that must accompany it.'
by Erina Chatterjee*
Punjab and Haryana High Court: While deciding the writ petition, a bench of Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J., directed the Medical Board to
“The nature of sexual violence and the contours of consent do not undergo a transformation when one decides to marry. The institution of marriage does not influence the answer to the question of whether a woman has consented to sexual relations. If the woman is in an abusive relationship, she may face great difficulty in accessing medical resources or consulting doctors.”
While the interim order was passed in the case on 21.07.2022, the Supreme Court took over two months to write a far-reaching 75-pages-long verdict, touching upon various aspects like purposive interpretation of Medical Termination of Pregnancy laws, equal status of married and unmarried or single women, right to reproductive autonomy, right to dignity, effect of unwanted pregnancy on mental health of women, etc.
“Denying an unmarried woman the right to a safe abortion violates her personal autonomy and freedom.”
Orissa High Court: S. K. Panigrahi, J. disposed of the petition and refused to terminate 24+ week pregnancy of a rape victim.
Bombay High Court: A Division Bench of R.M. Borde and N.J. Jamadar, JJ. allowed a petition for termination of pregnancy of the petitioner
High Court of Himachal Pradesh: While deciding a writ petition, a Division Bench comprising of Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. and Vivek Singh
Bombay High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Ranjit More and Prakash D. Naik, JJ. heard a petition requesting termination of pregnancy
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of Dipak Misra, CJ and AM Khanwilkar and Dr. DY Chandrachud, JJ issued notice to the Central
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of Dipak Misra, CJ and Amitava Roy and AM Khanwilkar, JJ allowed a 13-year-old rape survivor to terminate
Supreme Court: The 10-year-old girl, who’s plea to terminate her pregnancy was refused by the Supreme Court on 28.07.2017, will receive Rs.