The Delhi High Court on Friday refused to allow a 25-year-old unmarried woman terminate her pregnancy of 23 weeks and 5 days, Live Law reported.
A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad refused relief to the petitioner holding that that the woman’s pregnancy arose out of a consensual relationship and this is not covered under any clause of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003.
Under the law, abortion is permitted till 20 weeks of pregnancy, while for some categories of women it is permitted till 24 weeks.
The categories include women and minors who have faced sexual assault, have been raped or the child is borne out of incest. It also covers women with mental illnesses and those with disabilities as well as women pregnant in disaster or emergency situations and whose marital status changes during their pregnancy.
The conditions also state that abortion can be allowed if there is susbtantial risk that if the child is born, it would suffer from serious physical or mental abnormality.
At Friday’s hearing, the court said that since the law does not allow termination of pregnancy of an unmarried woman beyond 20 weeks, it cannot go beyond the statute.
“Granting interim relief now would amount to allowing the writ petition itself,” the bench noted, according to Bar and Bench.
The court, however, kept the petition pending and issued a notice to Delhi’s Health and Family Welfare Department to file its response in the case by August 26.
The woman, in her plea, had stated that even though her pregnancy arose out of a consensual relationship, she could not give birth as her partner had refused to marry her.
She had also told the court that giving birth out of wedlock would result in her ostracisation and cause her mental agony, according to Live Law.
She also said that she was not mentally prepared to be a mother and that continuing with the pregnancy will lead to grave physical and mental injury for her.
At previous hearing, the bench also suggested that the child can be given up for adoption.
“Why are you killing the child?” The chief justice had said. “There is a big queue for child adoption.”
It also said that the bench was not forcing the woman to raise the child and everything will be looked after by the government or hospital. “I am willing to pay,” the chief justice had remarked.
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!