In a significant ruling affirming bodily autonomy, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld a married woman's right to undergo an abortion without requiring her husband's consent. The court stated that her willingness is the sole determining factor in such a decision.
Court's Landmark Observation on Autonomy
The bench of Justice Suvir Sehgal was hearing a petition filed by a 21-year-old woman from Fatehgarh-Sahib in Punjab. She sought permission to terminate her pregnancy in the second trimester. The woman, who was married in May, cited a turbulent and estranged relationship with her husband as the primary reason for her decision.
Justice Sehgal made a powerful observation, noting, "A married lady is the best judge to evaluate whether she intends to continue with pregnancy or get it aborted. Her willingness and consent is all that matters." This statement forms the core of the judgment, placing the woman's agency at the forefront.
Medical Examination and Court Proceedings
The legal process began when the High Court, on December 22, directed the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER) in Chandigarh to form a medical board. The board's task was to examine the petitioner and assess the feasibility of terminating her pregnancy.
PGIMER constituted a board with experts from:
- Obstetrics and Gynaecology
- Internal Medicine
- Psychiatry
- Radiodiagnosis
- Hospital Administration
In its report submitted on December 23, the board found the woman medically fit for the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP). It noted the gestational age of the foetus was 16 weeks and a day, with no congenital malformations. Crucially, the board reported that while the patient had symptoms of depression and anxiety for the past six months and was severely distressed about the pregnancy amid divorce proceedings, she was psychologically fit to give consent.
The Final Verdict and Its Implications
After examining the medical reports, Justice Sehgal's bench noted that the pregnancy was within the legally permissible limit of 20 weeks for an MTP. The court explicitly addressed the central legal question—whether the consent of an estranged husband was necessary.
The court found no legal obstacle and allowed the petition. It directed, "This court does not find any obstacle in permitting the petitioner to undergo abortion. It is directed that the petitioner is eligible to get the pregnancy terminated... Let the petitioner within the next week, get the medical termination of pregnancy at PGIMER, Chandigarh, or any other authorised hospital."
This judgment reinforces the principle that a woman's right to make decisions about her own body, including reproductive choices, is paramount. It clarifies the legal position for married women, especially those in difficult marital situations, ensuring their consent is the primary and sufficient requirement for proceeding with an abortion under the MTP Act.
