Today, while hearing a request for the medical termination of pregnancy for a married woman in her 24th week of pregnancy, the Supreme Court made an oral observation. The Court expressed concerns that granting such requests might open the doors of the Supreme Court to parents who have second thoughts about their pregnancies.

The petitioner, a mother of two children, informed the Supreme Court that she is suffering from Lactational Amenorrhea and post-partum depression. Consequently, she asserted that her family is not equipped to provide for a third child.

A bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice BV Nagarathna while issuing notice in the plea, directed a medical board to be constituted by AIIMS to assess the medical condition of the petitioner. The petitioner has been asked to be present before the medical board tomorrow (06.10.2023) and the matter has been posted for further consideration on Monday (09.10.2023).

During the hearing of the plea, the Bench initially expressed its disinclination to entertain the plea emphasizing that the conception was a voluntary act. The Court underscored the significant difference between pregnancies resulting from assault, which are involuntary, and pregnancies that occur by choice.

The bench further questione the Council for Petitioner - 

 “Here the child is born within the marriage, they have voluntarily conceived the child and suddenly the parents get cold feet. What do you do in such circumstances?” 

“A married lady, with 2 children, misses her period and she doesn’t notice that something was wrong? 5 months the lady did not realise that she missed her period? How can we open our doors that wide? Look at larger picture. We owe a duty to law, the state and to that life. She and her husband should have been cautious, not just her. We’re talking about precious life here,” the Bench said.

The Court also questioned the Petitioner as to why she did not approach the Delhi High Court under Art. 226. “Imagine someone from Kerala of Karnataka coming straight to the Supreme Court under Art. 32 for this?” Justice Nagarathna said. ‘You are taking advantage of the fact that you are in Delhi,’ Justice Hima Kohli added.

To this, the Counsel said that since she is under psychiatric treatment and taking medication, she apprehends that the child born may not be ‘normal’.

However, the Court said that from the medical records produced before it, the scans did not show any anomaly.

Also Read - SC set-aside Calcutta HC orders, allows Delayed Written Submission