The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted interim anticipatory bail to a gynecologist who practices Ayurveda and was accused of performing an unauthorized pregnancy termination. The case has sparked a debate about whether the procedure in question was a termination or a premature delivery.

The court took into consideration the arguments put forth by the Ayurveda practitioner's counsel, stating that if the case is determined to be one of premature delivery rather than pregnancy termination, the doctor may be entitled to the benefit of a circular issued in 2017 by the government of India. This circular permits certain practitioners of Indian medicine, including Ayurvedic doctors, to perform deliveries.

The communication referred to in the court's order clarified that doctors possessing qualifications listed in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th schedules of the Indian Medicine Central Council (IMCC) Act, 1970, are authorized to conduct deliveries of pregnant women.

Justice Pankaj Jain, presiding over the case, granted the Ayurvedic doctor anticipatory bail on an interim basis while instructing her to cooperate with the ongoing investigation. The charges against her involve allegations of criminal conspiracy and violations of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act.

The case unfolded when authorities received confidential information about an illegal abortion being performed at a hospital in Kaithal. A team led by a civil surgeon conducted an inspection and allegedly discovered that the abortion was sought due to a condition known as water in the foetus' head, which can affect the foetus's development.

The prosecution claimed that the Ayurveda doctor had advised the couple to terminate the pregnancy due to it being categorized as a high-risk pregnancy. Subsequently, a first information report (FIR) was registered last month.

During the court proceedings, the doctor's counsel emphasized her qualifications as an Ayurveda Dhanwantri Prasooti Tantra and Streeroga degree holder, working as a gynaecologist in a nursing home. The counsel further stated that the entire procedure had been documented and was in possession of the investigating agency, negating any concern of tampering with evidence.

Granting relief to the petitioner, the court scheduled the next hearing for September 26. Senior Advocate Bipan Ghai, along with advocates Nikhil Ghai and Rishab Singla, represented the Ayurvedic doctor in the case.

Case Title: Mehak v State of Haryana

Click here to read order