LexSUCHITA SRIVASTAVA & ANR. versus CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 989 ~ SUCHITA SRIVASTAVA & ANR. A v. CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION (Civil Appeal No.5845 of 2009) AUGUST 28, 2009 B [K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJI., P. SATHASIVAM AND DR. -.( B.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.] \" MEDICAL TERM/NATION OF PREGNANCY ACT, 1971: c ss. 3(4)(a) and (b)- Termination of pregnancy by medical practitioners in certain cases - Mentally retarded orphan in a Government run welfare home -Found pregnant - Petition _;, by administration seeking approval to terminate the D -r pregnancy- Report of expert body that the ~rphan was in mild to moderate mental retardation and was willing to bear a child - High Court granting approval to terminate the pregnancy - Held: The statute clearly contemplates that even a mentally retarded woman should give her consent for termination of the pregnancy - State must respect personal autonomy of a E mentally retarded woman with regard to decisions about :( terminating a pregnancy - A woman's right to make reproductive choices is also a dimension of 'personal liberty' ;.. under Article 21 of the Constitution - In view of the findings of expert body in favour of continuation of the pregnancy, the F · direction given by High Court to terminate the pregnancy was not in victim's 'best interests' - It is directed that the bes( medical facilities be made available to the victim so as to ensure proper care and supervision during the period of pregnancy as well as for post natal care - Constitution of G India, 1950 - Article 21 - United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Mentally Retarded Persons, 1971 - Principle 7. ss.2(b) and 3(4)(a) - 'Mentally ill person' - Held: Is different from a person who is in mental retardation .... 989 H 990 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. A, Legislative provisions clearly show that persons who are in a condition of mental retardation should ordinarily be treated differently from those who are mentally ill - Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 - ss.2(i), (q) and (r). B s. 3(4)(a) - Consent of guardian for terminating pregnancy of a minor/mentally ill person - HELD: While a guardian can make decisions on behalf of a 'mentally ill person' the same cannot be done on behalf of a 'mentally retarded person' - Besides, considering the distinct standards, C namely 'best interests' and 'substituted judgment test' and the doctrine of 'Parens Patriae~ in the instant case, 'best interests'· standard would be applicable and keeping in view the 'best interests' of the victim,· termination of pregnancy would not serve the objective - Doctrine of 'Parens Patriae' - Best D ~interests' and 'substituted judgment' tests. WORDS AND PHRASES: Expression 'mental illness' and 'mental retardation' - Distinction between in the context of Medical Termination of E Pregnancy Act. A mentally retarded orphan aged 19-20 years, sheltered in a governme·nt-run welfare home, was found ·in the 19th week of pregnancy. The respondent F Administration approached the High court seeking its approval for termination of the pregnancy. The High .Court appointed an expert body which gave its findings that the victim was in mild to moderate mental retardation and that she expressed her willingness to bear a child. However, the High Court directed termination of the G pregnancy. In the instant appeal, the questions for consideration before the Court were: (i) whether the victim's pregnancy could b~ terminated even though she had expressed her H willingness to bear a child and (ii) whether her 'best SUCHITA SRIVASTAVA & ANR. v. CHANDIGARH 991 ADMINISTRATION ....._. interests' would be served by such termination. A )( Disposing of the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1. State must respect the personal autonomy of a mentally retarded woman with regard to decisions about terminating a pregnancy. A woman's B right to make reproductive choices is also a dimension of 'personal liberty' as understood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is important to recognise that reproductive choices can be exercised to procreate as well as to abstain from procreating. The crucial C consideration is that a woman's right to privacy, dignity and bodily integrity should be respected. [Para 11 and 15] [1008-G-H; 1011-G-H] 1.2. Section 3(4)(b) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 clearly lays down that obtaining the D conse
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.