10-yr-old rape survivor can't terminate pregnancy: SC

A 10-year-old rape survivor is now left with no option but to carry on with her 32-week pregnancy. The Supreme Court on Friday declined a request for termination of her pregnancy in view of a medical board's report stating that abortion would neither be good for the child nor for her foetus.
 
A bench of Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice D Y Chandrachud, however, asked the Union government to consider setting up a permanent medical board in states to examine pleas made for termination of pregnancy of foetus beyond statutorily laid down bar of 20-week.
 
The 10-year-old child's poignant case from Chandigarh was brought to the notice of the top court by advocate Alakh Alok Srivastava, who sought its immediate intervention. The court had on July 24 ordered for setting up of the medical board for her examination on July 26 at PGI Chandigarh.
 
After going through the report, the bench said, “In view of the reasons recorded, it would be neither be in interest of the girl child nor her foetus of 32-week to order abortion.”
 
The court also noted the girl was being given the best possible medical treatment at government hospital over there. The girl, whose father is a government employee and mother a domestic help, was allegedly raped by her own maternal uncle. The accused had been arrested on July 14 after a FIR was registered.

The bench, however, expressed its concern over large number of cases being filed in the apex court seeking permission for abortion of foetus of beyond 20-week limit as mandated under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971.

 

“In all such cases, time is very short. We are considering those cases under Article 142 (orders passed by the apex court to do complete justice). Can a permanent medical board be set up at state-level to examine the cases till the Bill is pending for amendment into the law,” the bench asked the Solicitor General.

The proposed amendment in the law is to increase the gestation period from present 20 to 24-week.

In the instant case, the bench also pulled up the petitioner-advocate for not approaching the Punjab and Haryana High Court and preferring to approach the top court against a district court's order of July 18 that had dismissed abortion plea in her case in view of the provisions of law.
 
The petitioner has sought to put in place guidelines for setting up a permanent mechanism including setting up a medical board at each district for immediate termination of pregnancies in the exceptional cases particularly involving child rape survivors.

Meanwhile, a separate bench allowed a woman's plea for abortion after medical board recommended for it in view of neurological disorders of the 24-week old foetus.