Follow Us
Satya Prakash
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, July 28
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a petition seeking permission for terminating the 32-week-old pregnancy of a 10-year-old rape survivor from Chandigarh, after a medical board of doctors from the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, opined against it.
(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)
The medical board set up on the orders of the Supreme Court said in its report that “abortion is neither good for the girl nor for the foetus.” The minor is carrying her unwanted pregnancy after being allegedly raped by her uncle.
Taking note of a larger number of petitions seeking permission to terminate pregnancy coming to the top court, a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India JS Khehar suggested to the government to consider setting up a permanent medical board in every district to take quick decisions in such cases.
The Bench asked Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar to convey its suggestion to the government. A Bill on the issue is already pending and the petitioner had requested the Bench to order the government to set up such a permanent medical board in each district.
The top court’s suggestion assumes significance in view of the fact that under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, a woman is not permitted to abort her foetus after the pregnancy crosses 20 weeks, unless the mother’s life is at risk. It’s for this reason that often pregnant women move the top court for permission to terminate pregnancy that has crossed 20 weeks.
The Bench refused to accede to petitioner counsel Alakh Alok Srivastav for shifting the rape survivor to PGI, Chandigarh, saying the medical care being provided to her at a government hospital in Sector 32 of Chandigarh was satisfactory.
It also pulled up the petitioner for directly coming to the top court bypassing the Punjab and Haryana High Court
During the hearing Aanchal Anand – a TV journalist – also made a brief submission to clarify certain aspects of the case but the court was not convinced that the minor could be allowed to terminate pregnancy.
The Supreme Court had on July 24 directed setting up of a medical board to examine the minor rape survivor to decide if it was safe to terminate her pregnancy.
The Bench had asked Chandigarh Legal Services Authority Member Secretary to assist it as amicus curiae and get the rape survivor examined by a board of doctors on July 26 at the PGI, Chandigarh. The Bench had asked the medical board to ascertain if allowed to abort the foetus, what could be the possible risk on the minor’s life. It had has asked the Member Secretary to ensure that the rape survivor and one of her parents were provided proper transportation facility for her medical examination.
A representative of the Chandigarh Legal Services Authority was present on the court during the hearing.
A Chandigarh district court had on July 18 refused to let the girl undergo the abortion after it was confirmed that she was 26-weeks pregnant.
“Medical experts have categorically opined that if the 10-year-old rape survivor is forced to give birth through normal delivery or C-section, it may be fatal to the life of the girl as well her child,” the petition read.
It wanted a direction to the Centre to amend Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, allowing pergnancies more than 20 weeks, particularly involving child rape survivors, to be ended after taking opinion of a permanently constituted medical board.
4
6