Bombay High Court
Guddi Ajayprakash Yadav And Anr vs State Of Maharashtra Through The ... on 21 May, 2021
Bench: S.J. Kathawalla, Surendra Pandharinath Tavade
1 / 6 7-WPL-11537-2021.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 11537 OF 2021
Guddi Ajayprakash Yadav and another ... Petitioners
Versus
State of Maharashtra and another ... Respondents
.........
Ms. Aditi Saxena alongwith Ms. Rachita Padwal for the Petitioners.
Ms. Uma Palsuledesai, AGP for the State.
Ms. Purnima Awasthi for Respondent No.2.
.........
CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA AND
SURENDRA P. TAVADE, JJ.
DATED : MAY 21, 2021.
(Vacation Court through video-conferencing)
P.C. :-
1. As recorded in our order dated 17th May, 2021, the Petitioner No.1 who
is pregnant with triplets has moved this Court for medical termination of her entire
pregnancy. In view thereof, we had directed the Dean of J.J. Group of Hospitals,
Mumbai to constitute the medical board comprising of the Dean of the Hospital, Head
of the Department (Gynecology), Professor and Head of Department of
Pediatric/Cardiac Surgeon, Professor and Head of Department of Radiology and Head
of Psychiatry Department, Professor and Head of Neurological Department and any
other expert in the field as the Dean may deem appropriate to be included to examine
the Petitioner No.1 and submit their report qua the termination of the entire
PA-Kanchan P Dhuri
2 / 6 7-WPL-11537-2021.odt
pregnancy of the Petitioner No.1 as sought by her in the above Writ Petition.
2. Accordingly, the Petitioner No.1 was present before the Board on 18 th
May, 2021 at 12.00 noon to enable the medical board to examine her and submit their
report to this Court today at 10.30 a.m. The Petitioner No.1 has been examined by the
Medical Board consisting of Dr. Preeti F. Lewis, Associate Professor, Dept. of OBGY;
Dr. Bela Verma, Professor and Head Dept. of Paediatrics; Dr. Shilpa Domkundwar,
Professor & Head Dept. of Radiology; Dr. V.P. Kale, Professor and Head Dept. of
Psychiatry; Dr. Kamlesh Jagiasi, Professor and Head Dept. of Neurology; and Ms.
Tanha Gawande, Clinical Psychologist Dept. of Psychiatry and a report dated 20 th
May, 2021 is submitted to this Court. We have perused the report and the Committee
opinion is reproduced hereunder :
"AFTER CAREFUL EXAMINATION AND OBSERVATION OF
PATIENT'S PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH, PERUSAL OF
INVESTIGATIONS AND WITH REFERENCE TO DR. PURNIMA SATOSKAR,
FOETAL MEDICINE EXPERT'S REPORT, THE COMMITTEE CONCLUDES
THAT AS PER FOETAL MEDICINE EXPERT THE TERMINATION OF THE
ENTIRE TRIPLET PREGNANCY IS ADVISABLE.
AS PER ULTRASOUND, FOETUS 1 HAS ANENCEPHALY AND FOETUS
2 HAS SOFT MARKER ON ULTRASOUND WHICH SUGGESTS THAT IT
COULD PROBABLY HAVE GENETIC ABNORMALITIES; THE CHANCES OF
WHICH ARE HIGH AS FOETUS 1 IS GROSSLY ANOMALOUS. THUS, THE
CONDITION OF THE TWO FOETII FULFIL THE CRITERIA OF
"SUBSTANTIAL RISK OF SERIOUS PHYSICAL HANDICAP WITH VERY
HIGH MORBIDITY AND OCCASIONAL MORTALITY". FOETUS 3 DOES
NOT SHOW ANY LETHAL CONGENITAL ANOMALY ON
PA-Kanchan P Dhuri
3 / 6 7-WPL-11537-2021.odt
ULTRASONOGRAPHY.
THE PSYCHIATRY OPINION RECOMMENDS TERMINATION OF
WHOLE PREGNANCY DUE TO THE MENTAL ILLNESS OF MOTHER AFTER
CONSULTING THE FAMILY MEMBERS.
DR. PURNIMA SATOSKAR, FOETAL MEDICINE EXPERT HAS
ADVICED TERMINATION OF ENTIRE PREGNANCY AS PER RCOG UK
GUIDELINES (I.E. FOETICIDE PRIOR TO TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY).
HOWEVER, AT PRESENT THERE ARE NO INDIAN GUIDELINES REGARDING
FOETICIDE PRIOR TO TERMINATION ON TERMINATION ON HEALTHY OR
UNHEALTHY FOETUS.
HENCE, COMMITTEE FEELS THAT IF THE HONOURABLE COURT
PERMITS THE TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY, THEN THE WHOLE
PROCEDURE OF TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY SHOULD BE DONE UNDER
THE DIRECT SUPERVISION OF FOETAL MEDICINE EXPERT WHO HAS
RECOMMENDED RCOG GUIDELINES FOR THE SAME.
THE PARENTS ARE WELL AWARE OF THE RISK AND
COMPLICATIONS OF THE PROCEDURE ON MOTHER. HOWEVER, SINCE
THE PREGNANCY HAS CROSSED THE CUT-OFF OF 24 WEEKS, AS PER THE
NEW AMENDMENT TO THE MTP ACT DATED 25TH MARCH 2021,
PERMISSION FROM THE COURT WILL BE MANDATORY TO TERMINATE
THE PREGNANCY.
IF THE HONORABLE COURT PERMITS, MEDICAL TERMINATION OF
PREGNANCY CAN BE DONE AS ADVICED BY THE COMMITTEE."
3. Some relevant facts placed before us on behalf of the Petitioner are set
out hereunder :
3.1 The Petitioner No.1 is a 41 year old married woman, and has an eight
year old child with her husband, that is, Petitioner No. 2.
3.2 The Petitioners live in poverty and are barely able to take care of the
PA-Kanchan P Dhuri
4 / 6 7-WPL-11537-2021.odt
sustenance of their elderly parent and their child.
3.3 Petitioner No.1 is a housewife and Petitioner No.2 is a transport driver
who transports goods from one State to the other. Petitioner No.2 is earning a meager
income of INR 12,000 to INR 15,000 monthly.
3.4 Petitioner No. 1 has a history of psychiatric treatment and was
prescribed certain medication for the same in October 2020. However, only after two
consultations she had to stop her treatment due to economic strain that came with the
treatment.
3.5 Petitioner No.1 is currently pregnant with triplets, i.e. three fetuses, at
23 weeks gestation. According to the Petitioners, this is a case of unwanted pregnancy
and has occurred as a result of failure of the method used by the Petitioner.
3.6 The Petitioners attribute the delay in the diagnosis and decision to seek
medical termination of pregnancy to the following:
a) Petitioner No.1 was not aware of her pregnancy till the 18 th - 19th week of
the gestation period.
b) Petitioner No.1 is probably suffering from psychological disorder and
due to poor judgment she was unable to reach out for medical assistance within the
stipulated time.
c) Petitioner No.2 remained stranded in Chennai for three months i.e. until
the end of April, due to COVID restrictions and lack of business to return with goods.
PA-Kanchan P Dhuri
5 / 6 7-WPL-11537-2021.odt
It was only upon his return that the Petitioner No.2 was able to support Petitioner No.
1 in seeking medical assistance.
4. The Advocate for the Petitioner has therefore submitted that given the
delayed diagnosis of the Petitioner No.1's pregnancy due to COVID-19 restrictions,
psychiatric history of the Petitioner, economic hardship suffered by the Petitioners and
this being a case of unwanted pregnancy, this is a fit case for granting permission under
Section 5 read with Section 3(2)(b) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act,
1971 (MTP Act, 1971).
5. In view of the above and more particularly, in view of the opinion of the
Committee of Doctors, that the continuation of pregnancy will affect the mental
health of Petitioner No.1, we pass the following Order :
(i) As per opinion of the Committee of the Medical Board of J.J. Group of
Hospitals, Mumbai, dated 20th May, 2021 the Petitioner No.1 is permitted to undergo
the procedure for medical termination of her entire pregnancy at Wadia Hospital,
Parel, Mumbai.
(ii) The Petitioner No.1 has offered to remain present at the Wadia Hospital,
Parel, Mumbai on 22nd May, 2021 at 12.00 noon, when the procedure for medical
termination of pregnancy shall be conducted by the concerned Doctors of the said
hospital.
(iii) In the event of the children being born alive, the Medical Practitioner
PA-Kanchan P Dhuri
6 / 6 7-WPL-11537-2021.odt
conducting the procedure shall ensure that all necessary facilities are made available to
such children for saving their lives.
(iv) In the event of the children being born alive and the Petitioners are not
willing to take responsibility of such children, the State and its agencies will have to
assume full responsibility for such children.
(v) The Petitioners as well as the Learned AGP agree that the Writ Petition
may be treated as disposed off. Ordered accordingly.
( SURENDRA P. TAVADE, J. ) ( S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. )
PA-Kanchan P Dhuri
