Because the couple developed differences after conception, the Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a married woman’s plea to terminate her nearly 26-week pregnancy, holding that a consensual pregnancy conceived within a subsisting marriage cannot be terminated merely.
The court’s decision came despite the woman’s counsel maintaining that she was unwilling to continue the pregnancy. Singh cautioned that allowing the plea could set a precedent for women seeking termination at much later stages of pregnancy by citing marital discord. The bench, however, noted that the pregnancy was consensual and had crossed the 24-week statutory limit under the MTP law. It questioned whether the extraordinary jurisdiction of a constitutional court under Article 142 should be exercised to permit termination in such circumstances. Advocate Devanshi Singh, appearing for Maharashtra, opposed the plea, submitting that the pregnancy was beyond 24 weeks and did not fall within any of the exceptions under the MTP Act. She said the foetus was viable and would be born even if the Supreme Court permitted termination under Article 142, adding that the court would have to consider the implications of stopping the heartbeat of a nearly 26-week foetus.
The woman, who had earlier alleged mental harassment and humiliation by her husband, told the bench that he had circulated a video among family members and friends questioning her character and alleging an extramarital relationship. The husband, who appeared before the court, said he had attempted reconciliation but the woman had made it conditional on his agreeing to the termination. “This court will have to draw a line somewhere,” she said, adding that the law imposed restrictions that could not be overlooked.
“She might have issues with her husband but that should not extend to the womb. The dispute had reached the Supreme Court after the Bombay High Court on October 26 dismissed the woman’s plea, holding that her case did not fall within the statutory categories permitting termination up to 24 weeks under the MTP Act and Rules. Because she has a problem with her husband?” asked the court, dismissing the woman’s petition after hearing both sides and interacting with the couple, why should she not have the child just.
