In an order issued on October 9, the Supreme Court emphasised the significance of family planning and the necessity of taking appropriate precautions while permitting the medical termination of pregnancy for a married woman who is 26 weeks into her pregnancy.
Details Of The Case
The recall request was submitted by the Union based on a follow-up medical report indicating a significant probability of the fetus surviving.
The panel composed of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice BV Nagarathna has deferred the issue to a more extensive bench for consideration.
As reported by Live Law, the individual who filed the petition informed the Court that she had relied on the Lactational Amenorrhea contraceptive method while breastfeeding her second child. Unfortunately, this contraception method proved ineffective and led to her pregnancy, which she only realised at a later stage.
The court ruling emphasised that an unintended pregnancy doesn't just result in the birth of an undesired child but also brings along a multitude of anxieties and complications that extend beyond the mother's physical health, affecting her psychologically and mentally.
"Therefore, it is anticipated that married couples exercise care in family planning and take timely preventive measures to avoid finding themselves in a situation where they have to seek a legal remedy for abortion that has surpassed the critical stage, as seen in the present case at 26 weeks."
The Court Ruling
The Court further noted that as the most populous nation globally, every Indian has an obligation to consider family planning. Once children are born, parents are entrusted with the duty of nurturing them to become responsible and well-adjusted members of society.
The country is working towards attaining social and economic progress with the constraints of available means and resources. Concerning family planning, every citizen bears an equal responsibility to fulfil the best interests of society and the nation.
Additionally, the Court emphasized that both the central and state governments should implement sufficient measures to guarantee that citizens are well-informed about government programs related to family planning and maternal healthcare.
The Court also seized the occasion to emphasize the detriments of female infanticide, even though the current case didn't revolve around that issue.
"This Court is aware of the patriarchal values in the country and the strong inclination to have a male heir, who can continue the family's name."
Suggested Reading: Equal Access In Law: SC Hears Argument From A Deaf And Mute Lawyer