Forcing Woman To Continue Pregnancy Violates Bodily Integrity And Worsens Mental Trauma: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has held that forcing a woman to continue with an unwanted pregnancy amounts to a violation of her bodily integrity and aggravates her mental trauma, which can be seriously detrimental to her mental health.

The ruling was delivered by a Bench presided over by Justice Neena Bansal Krishna while allowing a petition filed by an estranged wife who had been summoned in a criminal case after her husband accused her of causing miscarriage under Section 312 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Court discharged the woman, observing that she was 14 weeks pregnant when she took the decision to terminate her pregnancy due to marital discord. This fact was recorded in her medical OPD card dated 16 August 2022, which noted that she sought termination on account of marital discord and her intention to seek separation in the future.

Justice Bansal Krishna emphasised that reproductive autonomy is an intrinsic part of a woman’s right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.

“In the light of the aforesaid discussion, when the Apex Court, in its aforementioned judgments, has recognized the autonomy of a woman to seek abortion in a situation of marital discord which can impact her mental health, and also the provisions of Section 3 of the MTP Act and the Rules framed therein, it cannot be said that an offence under Section 312 IPC was committed by the petitioner,” the judge added.

“The harsh reality of this misogynistic world cannot be ignored while considering the mental trauma of a woman facing marital discord, which gets compounded many times if she is pregnant,” the Court observed. It added that women are often left to shoulder the responsibility of raising a child alone, without emotional, social or financial support, leading to insurmountable difficulties and grave mental trauma.

The case arose from a criminal complaint filed by the husband, who accused the woman of offences under Sections 182, 192, 195, 196, 312, 379, 384, 406, 420, 500, 506, 34 and 120B of the IPC. A magistrate had summoned the woman for the offence under Section 312, and the order was later upheld by a sessions court.

Challenging this, the woman approached the High Court, arguing that she had undergone the termination procedure voluntarily at a registered hospital under qualified medical supervision and strictly within the statutory gestational limit of less than 20 weeks, as permitted under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act. She contended that her fundamental rights to privacy, bodily integrity and decisional autonomy had been criminalised, despite the absence of any criminal intent or mens rea.

Opposing the plea, the husband argued that there was no marital discord at the time the woman consented to the pregnancy and that the discord surfaced only later when she left the matrimonial home. He claimed that since the couple was living together at the relevant time, she could not rely on the provisions of the MTP Act or the rules framed under it.

The High Court rejected this contention, holding that marital discord cannot be narrowly interpreted to exist only after physical separation or the initiation of litigation.

The Court noted that the medical records clearly showed that the woman was already experiencing marital stress and had taken a conscious decision regarding separation.

It further observed that the very fact that the woman felt stressed due to marital discord created a situation where the continuation of pregnancy was likely to adversely impact her mental health. The attending doctor had also recorded in the OPD card that, in light of Supreme Court rulings delivered in September 2022, abortion could not be denied and accordingly proceeded with the termination.

“A woman undergoing marital discord is entitled to the termination of pregnancy; more so, as the MTP Act does not contain any provision requiring a woman to obtain the husband’s permission for termination of pregnancy. The reason is that it is a woman who bears the stress and strain of the pregnancy and the delivery. A woman who was undergoing marital discord was, therefore, allowed to terminate the pregnancy,” the Court added.

Thus, the High Court held that no offence under Section 312 IPC was made out. It accordingly set aside the orders of the sessions court and the magistrate and discharged the woman from the criminal proceedings.

Case Title: X vs State of NCT of Delhi

Bench: Justice Neena Bansal Krishna

Order Date: 6 January 2025