Guwahati: The Gauhati High Court has allowed a 15-year-old gangrape victim from Assam‘s Tinsukia to abort her 26-week-old pregnancy in her ’best interest’. Taking suo motu cognizance of the media report, a division bench of Justice Kalyan Rai Surana and Justice Sushmita phukan Khand on Monday directed the state government to ‘medically abort’ the unwanted fetus and submit the state report by December 19.
According to the Medical Abortion Act,1971 (MTPA),termination of pregnancy beyond 24 weeks is not permitted.
What is the whole matter?
The court order said that according to the news published on november 29, when the victim was only 14 years old, she was gang-raped by seven people, including four minors, in Tinsukia. During the suo motu hearing on December 5, the High Court had constituted a medical board and a district level committee as per the MTPA and asked them to examine the victim to determine whether termination of the unwanted pregnancy would be appropriate. The High Court had specifically asked him to inform it about the risks associated with the procedure.
Unwanted pregnancy of more than 26 weeks in the stomach
The medical board, in its report, said the girl was fit to undergo any obstetric procedure, but the board refrained from suggesting termination of pregnancy in view of the MTPA. The High court said that the court is aware of the fact that the girl is a minor and at present she is carrying an unwanted pregnancy of more than 26 weeks. The court is also aware of the fact that if the pregnancy is terminated at this stage, the life of the victim is in danger.
What did the court say?
The High Court observed that however, when comparing the present situation with the risk faced by the victim at the time of delivery at full-term pregnancy, the risk factors at the present stage appear to be similar. Also, the risk at the time of delivery is the same during a full-term pregnancy.Citing a judgment delivered by the Supreme Court in April this year in a similar case in Maharashtra, the Gauhati high Court said it had the power to order medical abortion under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Have the right.
What are the implications of the Gauhati High Court ruling on future abortion cases involving minors in India?
interview Between Time.news Editor and Legal Expert on Recent Gauhati High Court Ruling
Time.news Editor: Thank you for joining us today. We’re here to discuss the recent decision by the Gauhati High Court regarding the abortion of a 15-year-old gang-rape victim’s 26-week pregnancy. Could you provide us with a brief overview of the case?
legal Expert: Certainly. This case involves a 15-year-old girl from Tinsukia, Assam, who was gang-raped when she was just 14. The tragic situation escalated when she discovered she was pregnant—over 26 weeks into her pregnancy at the time of the court’s decision. Given her status as a minor and the circumstances surrounding the conception, the High Court stepped in to allow an abortion, which goes against the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act that typically prohibits such procedures after 24 weeks.
Time.news Editor: That’s quite a critically important ruling. What where the main factors that influenced the court’s decision to override the MTPA in this case?
Legal Expert: The court considered several factors. First, it acknowledged the physical and psychological risks to the minor if the pregnancy continued. It also took into account a precedent set by the Supreme Court earlier in the year in a similar case from Maharashtra, which established that courts can intervene for medical abortions in extraordinary circumstances under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The court ultimately decided that allowing the abortion was in the victim’s best interest, weighing the potential life-threatening risks associated with carrying the pregnancy to term.
Time.news Editor: There are significant legal and ethical implications here. How does this ruling impact the current legal framework surrounding abortion in india, particularly with the MTPA?
Legal Expert: The ruling indeed raises critical questions. While the MTPA provides a structured approach to abortion, this case illustrates that courts can assert their authority in exceptional situations, especially when the health and rights of minors are at stake. It may prompt lawmakers to rethink or amend the MTPA, potentially allowing for more versatility regarding later-term abortions in cases of rape or severe health risks. This ruling could become a touchstone for future cases and discussions around women’s reproductive rights in India.
Time.news Editor: Given the emotional and psychological aspects, how should society approach support for victims like this young girl?
Legal Expert: It is crucial to provide holistic support for victims of sexual violence, including psychological counseling and medical care. Society needs to create a nurturing environment that emphasizes understanding and compassion rather than judgment. Additionally, legal support to navigate the intricacies of such cases is vital to ensure that these victims receive justice without further trauma.
Time.news Editor: what advice would you offer to policymakers considering this case?
Legal Expert: Policymakers must prioritize the health and rights of minors within the legislative framework on reproductive health. There should be clear guidelines on how to handle cases like this sensitively and expediently. It’s also essential to improve access to education about reproductive rights and health services, ensuring that victims of violence have the resources and support they need. The legal system, healthcare providers, and social services should work in tandem to protect and empower vulnerable individuals.
Time.news Editor: Thank you for your insights. This case undoubtedly brings to the forefront critical issues surrounding legal protections for minors and reproductive rights in India.
Legal Expert: Thank you for having me. It’s a vital conversation that needs to continue in order to advocate for a safer and more just society for all.