The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to entertain a petition by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences against an order by a two-judge bench allowing the termination of a 30-week pregnancy of a minor girl, The Indian Express reported.
A bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant said that it would “not allow the institution to choose for the parents” and noted that the girl was pregnant because she was raped. However, it allowed doctors from the institute to counsel the girl and her family so that they could make an informed choice, Live Law reported.
On April 24, a separate bench headed by Justice BV Nagarathna had allowed the pregnancy to be medically terminated, and had directed AIIMS to carry out the procedure. On Wednesday, the same bench dismissed a review petition filed by the institute on Wednesday, after which it moved a curative petition before another bench.
On Thursday, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati told the bench headed by the chief justice that the foetus is now 30 weeks old and in four weeks, the newborn could be given for adoption, Live Law reported.
She argued that there was a high likelihood of the foetus being born alive and added that termination at this stage could cause irreversible harm to the minor.
Bhati also said that the termination of the pregnancy would involve administering an injection through the womb to stop the foetus’ heart, which is a complicated procedure.
Kant, however, said that the hospital should consider not just the condition of the foetus, but also the trauma faced by the minor. “This is a case of child rape,” The Indian Express quoted Kant as saying. “Victim will have a lifelong scar and trauma. This is a foetus vs child fight.”
Bhati then said that the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act has prescribed a limit of 24 weeks due to health risks beyond that period.
However, the chief justice verbally remarked that the Union government should amend the law to clarify that the 24-week limit would not apply in cases where a minor who was raped is pregnant.
In its curative petition, AIIMS contended that while the April 24 order referred to termination of pregnancy, the medical reality was that the procedure would result in the premature delivery of a “viable child”, The Indian Express reported.
Bhati said the procedure to terminate the pregnancy would amount to foeticide and could harm the minor.
However, Justice Joymala Bagchi said that any curative petition should be filed by the girl’s parents, not by the institute. “Let us not make it a fight between the state and the citizens,” The Indian Express quoted Bagchi as saying. “It is not for AIIMS to choose for the citizens. It is just to render medical service.”
The bench said that the medical institute could counsel the parents, but it could not approach the court with another petition.
Just 0.2% of readers pay for news. The others don’t care if it dies. You can help make a difference. Support independent journalism – join Scroll now.
We’re not driven by clicks or corporate interests – just honest, independent reporting. Keep us going. Support Scroll today!