Allahabad High Court persuades teenage girl, relatives to avoid risky abortion of pregnancy

A 15-year-old girl and her family recently opted not to insist on their plea to terminate a 32-week pregnancy carried by the girl after the Allahabad High Court explained the health risks involved in aborting the late-stage pregnancy [X v State]..A Bench of Justice Shekhar B Saraf and Justice Manjive Shukla also reiterated that it is always the pregnant woman's decision whether or not to get an abortion. Her consent reigns supreme, the Court said."The Courts have held that the choice of terminating one’s pregnancy is a serious and delicate issue that needs to be dealt with a caring touch and in a humane manner. This Court is also of the opinion that a woman’s decision in whether or not to go ahead with the termination of her pregnancy is a decision that is to be taken by no one but herself. This is primarily based on the widely acknowledged idea of bodily autonomy. Here, her consent reigns supreme," the July 24 order stated. .In the present case, however, a medical panel informed the Court there were serious health risks involved in going through with the termination of the pregnancy which was at 32 weeks when the matter was heard on July 24. The panel acknowledged that continuing with the pregnancy would impact the mental and physical well-being of the teenager, but added there cannot be any termination of such a late-stage pregnancy without serious health complications. The Court, therefore, counselled the girl (a victim of statutory rape) and her family about the risks associated with terminating a pregnancy at 32 weeks. Ultimately, the girl and her parents decided to continue with the pregnancy and explore giving up the child for adoption. "The Court decided to counsel the girl and her relatives in the presence of the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as the counsel on behalf of the State. The court explained to the petitioner the risks involved in the termination due to the late stage of pregnancy. The petitioner and the relatives upon being made to understand the risks to the life of the petitioner and future risks with regard to losing the ability to be pregnant, subsequently opted to deliver the child instead of terminating the said pregnancy. The girl and her mother were both of the opinion that they would like to put the child for adoption post-parturition," the Court's order recounted, in this regard. The Court proceeded to issue directions to enable the delivery of the child while also giving strict instructions to maintain confidentiality. The State must ensure that the adoption process too is carried out efficiently and that the ‘best interests of the child’ principle is followed, the Court added."Even if she decides to go ahead with the pregnancy and put the child up for adoption, the duty lies on the State to ensure that it is carried out as privately as possible and also to ensure that the child, being a citizen of this land, is not stripped of the fundamental rights that are enshrined in the Constitution," the Court said..By way of background, the 15-year-old girl's uncle had filed a criminal complaint alleging that his niece was enticed and kidnapped by a man. The girl was eventually found carrying a 29-week pregnancy. Therefore, rape charges and offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) were also added.Thereafter, a petition was filed before the High Court seeking permission to terminate the pregnancy.The Court examined reports from three medical panels and was eventually informed that terminating the pregnancy at this stage would pose significant health risks to the minor girl.After this aspect was explained to the minor girl and her family, they decided not to go through with their abortion plea. .The Court ordered the State to bear all the expenses for the delivery of the child. Additionally, the Court directed the Director of the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) to take appropriate steps to facilitate the adoption of the child once born.The matter will be heard again on August 28. .Advocates Desh Ratan Chaudhary and Siddharth Chaudhary appeared for the petitioner (minor girl, represented by her guardian). Standing Counsel Birendra Prasad Shukla appeared for the State. .[Read Order]