Nagpur: In a significant development, a 32-year-old rape survivor in Nagpur, who had petitioned the Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court to permit the termination of her 22-week pregnancy, has reconsidered her decision. This change of heart came after a medical report from Chandrapur Government Medical College and Hospital revealed that the foetus was fully developed and could potentially result in a live birth, as reported by a local daily.
The woman had initially approached the High Court seeking permission for an abortion under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971. In response, the court directed a medical examination to evaluate the feasibility and risks of terminating the pregnancy at 22 weeks.
Today’s Rate
Friday 22 Nov. 2024
The medical assessment underscored the heightened risk of complications associated with aborting a foetus at this advanced stage. The report mentioned that certain medical methods could be used for termination, but if these failed, a surgical procedure like hysterotomy might be necessary, with a live birth being a possible outcome.
Represented by counsel SH Bhatia, the survivor had initially sought to terminate the pregnancy on March 29, when the foetus was estimated to be 14-16 weeks old. However, due to delays and lack of response from the hospital at that time, the pregnancy progressed to 22 weeks.
The petitioner, referring to the accused as her husband, revealed a history of sexual, mental, and physical exploitation spanning nearly three years. She stated that the accused had promised to divorce his first wife, who was unable to conceive, and under this pretext, he continued to exploit her. The survivor already has a 13-month-old child from this relationship and had previously aborted another pregnancy in November of the previous year.
The court, presided over by vacation judge Vrushali Joshi, noted the complex circumstances of the case. The judge remarked that the petitioner had initially sought the termination by alleging rape against her husband, motivated by the deception and exploitation she had endured. However, upon reviewing the medical report and considering the potential complications, the petitioner decided to continue with the pregnancy.
In light of the medical findings and the survivor’s changed stance, the court ruled, “The petitioner changed her mind considering the medical report and is willing to continue the pregnancy. The petition stands disposed of.”
This case highlights the critical role of timely medical and legal intervention in matters of reproductive rights and the profound impact such decisions have on the lives of survivors of abuse.
