A bench of justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan said the husband must express regret and apologise for the allegations, observing that the couple’s differences had “snowballed” into a situation where the woman was seeking to terminate her first pregnancy despite there being no medical reason to do so.
The court posted the matter for November 4, allowing the husband to file an affidavit withdrawing allegations made against his wife in any form, whether orally, in writing or digitally.
Your ego kills everything,” remarked the bench during the hearing, questioning whether every marital disagreement should lead to a decision to end a pregnancy. It stressed that the unborn child was also his, and that the court could not treat an exchange of allegations between spouses as sufficient justification for terminating the pregnancy. It directed the parties to appear, after which it passed an order permitting the husband to file an affidavit withdrawing all allegations against his wife. The latest hearing follows the court’s intervention last week, when it urged the estranged couple to give their six-month-old marriage another chance before deciding the woman’s plea to terminate her pregnancy. The bench had then asked the husband to reach out to his wife, who has been staying with her parents since August, and provide assurances that she and the child would be cared for.
“Because of a bitter exchange of words, we cannot allow termination of pregnancy.
The bench told the husband that such allegations and material could be withdrawn and put behind them if he was willing to apologise. It said harsh words or use of abusive language by a husband or in-laws should not automatically result in termination of pregnancy, distinguishing such a situation from one where a woman had divorced or was already divorced and sought termination. “Merely because husband says something, you will terminate your pregnancy?” asked the court, adding that spouses should be able to withstand differences in a relationship. The court also noted that the foetus was healthy and the woman was medically fit, and said there was no medical reason warranting termination.
The Bombay High court had dismissed the woman’s plea on October 26, holding that her case did not fall within the statutory categories permitting termination up to 24 weeks under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act and Rules. It noted that the couple remained married, the foetus had no congenital anomalies and the allegations of force, continuous mental cruelty and harassment had not been established.
