{"id":274798,"date":"2022-09-30T17:00:02","date_gmt":"2022-09-30T11:30:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=274798"},"modified":"2022-09-30T17:00:02","modified_gmt":"2022-09-30T11:30:02","slug":"kerala-high-court-medical-termination-of-pregnancy-act-1971-section-498a-ipc-family-planning-clinic-right-to-privacy-fundamental-right-dignity-change-of-marital-status-rule-3b-of-mtp-act-mental","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/30\/kerala-high-court-medical-termination-of-pregnancy-act-1971-section-498a-ipc-family-planning-clinic-right-to-privacy-fundamental-right-dignity-change-of-marital-status-rule-3b-of-mtp-act-mental\/","title":{"rendered":"Kerala High Court No provision in MTP Act, 1971 requires woman to obtain her husband’s permission for terminating the pregnancy; Permits petitioner to undergo Medical termination of pregnancy"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

   <\/p>\n

Kerala High Court<\/b>: In a petition filed by a 21-year-old girl, seeking medical termination of her pregnancy, V.G. Arun, J. observed that the drastic change in the matrimonial life of a pregnant woman is equivalent to the ‘change of her marital status’ and she cannot be denied permission for terminating her pregnancy, on the premise that she is not legally divorced, and her marital status has therefore not changed. Further, the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (‘MTP’) Act, 1971<\/a> does not contain any provision requiring the woman to obtain her husband’s permission for terminating the pregnancy, as the woman bears the stress and strain of the pregnancy and the delivery.<\/p>\n

In this case, the petitioner against her family wishes married the respondent. Thereafter, the respondent and his mother started ill- treating her. In the meanwhile, she became pregnant, however, the respondent raised suspicion regarding the paternity of the unborn baby and on that excuse, refused to provide any sort of support, either financial or emotional, to the petitioner. The psychological impact of the cruelty, the ignominy of having to go back to her parents, and the lack of emotional and psychological support made the stress and strain of the pregnancy unbearable. Therefore, the petitioner decided to terminate her pregnancy and she approached the Family Planning Clinic, however, the Doctors at the clinic refused to terminate the pregnancy as there were no legal documents to prove separation\/divorce of the petitioner with the respondent. Therefore, she filed a complaint against the respondent and his mother for the offence punishable under Section 498-A<\/a> r\/w 34<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a>. Thereafter, she again approached the clinic, but the doctors once again refused to relent to her request, as the pregnancy was of 21 weeks 2 days gestation and there was no indication of fetal anomaly or maternal illness.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that the MTP Act, 1971<\/a> was introduced with intention to liberalise certain existing provisions relating to termination of pregnancy as health measures, like:<\/p>\n