In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India, on Tuesday, granted permission to a rape victim from Gujarat to terminate her pregnancy. The court poignantly observed that while pregnancy within the confines of marriage is celebrated as a joyous occasion, it can have severe mental health implications when it is unwanted and outside the institution of marriage.
Gujarat High Court’s Decision Overruled
The apex court expressed its displeasure with the Gujarat High Court for its earlier rejection of the plea. In a stern statement, the Supreme Court remarked, “What is happening in Gujarat High Court? No court in India can pass an order against a superior court order. It is against constitutional philosophy.”
Details of the Case
The bench, comprising Justice B V Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, convened a special sitting last week to hear the plea of the rape victim seeking to terminate her pregnancy. The court directed her to undergo a fresh medical examination and mandated the hospital to submit the report by August 20.
The Supreme Court also criticized the Gujarat High Court for its perceived lack of urgency, emphasizing that such matters should not be treated with a “lackadaisical attitude.”
During the proceedings, the counsel for the petitioner informed the apex court that the 25-year-old woman had approached the high court on August 7. The high court, on August 8, directed the formation of a medical board to determine the status of the pregnancy and the health of the petitioner. The medical college, after examining her, submitted the report on August 10. However, the high court took the report on record on August 11 but, in a puzzling move, listed the matter for hearing 12 days later, on August 23, overlooking the urgency and significance of each passing day in such a case.
This decision by the Supreme Court underscores the importance of timely judicial intervention, especially in sensitive matters.
- It also raises questions about the functioning of certain courts and their understanding of pressing issues. What are your thoughts on this?
- Do you believe the judiciary should always prioritize cases of such gravity?
Be the first to comment