X versus M/S SHAPOORJI PALLONJI AND COMPANY PVT. LTD. & ORS.

Citation: [2023] 15 S.C.R. 443 · Decided: 16-10-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Disposed off

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2023] 15 S.C.R. 443 : 2023 INSC 919
443
CASE DETAILS
X
v.
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.
(Miscellaneous Application No. 2157 of 2023)
In
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1137 of 2023)
OCTOBER 16, 2023
[DR DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, CJI, 
J. B. PARDIWALA AND MANOJ MISRA, JJ.]
HEADNOTES
Issue for consideration: Petition under Article 32 fi led for directions 
to the respondents to permit a medical termination of the Petitioner’s ongoing 
pregnancy. Relief sought, if can be granted; and the nature of the jurisdiction 
under which this Court is adjudicating this case.
 Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 – ss.3(2B), 5 – 
According to the Petitioner, she did not discover that she was pregnant 
until after twenty weeks of the pregnancy had elapsed because she 
had lactational amenorrhea as a result of which breastfeeding 
women do not menstruate – On undergoing an ultrasound scan, the 
pregnancy was estimated to be around twenty-four weeks at that 
time – Attempts to medically terminate the pregnancy failed – Writ 
petition fi led – Petitioner was directed to appear before a Medical 
Board constituted by the AIIMS, New Delhi – Report submitted – 
Petition allowed, medical termination of the pregnancy permitted 
by this Court vide order dtd.09.10.2023 – However, a doctor from 
AIIMS (who was a member of the Medical Board) emailed Ms. ‘AB’, 
ASG, stating that the foetus has a strong chance of survival and 
sought directions from this Court as to whether a foeticide should 
be carried out – Application for recall of the order dtd.09.10.2023 
fi led by ASG, heard by the same bench which had heard the petition 
earlier – Split verdict – Petition listed before the present three judge 
444 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2023] 15 S.C.R.
Bench – A further report called from AIIMS on certain specifi c issues 
– Report submitted:
Held: Length of the pregnancy has crossed twenty-four weeks – It is 
now approximately twenty-six weeks and fi ve days – A medical termination 
of the pregnancy cannot be permitted as having crossed the statutory limit of 
twenty-four weeks, the requirements in either of s.3(2B) or s.5 must be met; 
there are no “substantial foetal abnormalities” diagnosed by a Medical Board, 
in terms of s.3(2B) – A second medical report was called from AIIMS to 
ensure that the facts of the case were accurately placed before this Court and 
no foetal abnormality was detected; and neither of the two reports submitted 
by the Medical Boards indicate that a termination is immediately necessary 
to save the life of the Petitioner, in terms of s.5 – Under Article 142, this 
Court has the power to do complete justice – However, this power may not 
be attracted in every case – If a medical termination were to be conducted 
at this stage, the doctors would be faced with a viable foetus – One of the 
options before this Court, which the email from AIIMS had fl agged, was for 
it to direct the doctors to stop the heartbeat – This Court is averse to issuing 
a direction of this nature – Petitioner, too, did not wish for this Court to 
issue such a direction – In the absence of a direction to stop the heartbeat, 
the viable foetus would be faced with a signifi cant risk of lifelong physical 
and mental disabilities – Prayer for the medical termination of the pregnancy 
not acceded to– Application for recall of the order dtd. 09.10.2023 allowed– 
Delivery will be conducted by AIIMS at the appropriate time– Union 
Government has undertaken to pay all the medical costs for the delivery 
and incidental to it– In case, the petitioner is inclined to give the child up 
for adoption, the Union Government has stated that they shall ensure that 
this process takes place at the earliest, and in a smooth fashion– Medical 
Termination of Pregnancy Rules 2003 (as amended in 2021)– Constitution 
of India– Article 142. [Paras 24-29]
Practice and Procedure – Final judgment/order – Challenge 
to – Union of India fi led application for the recall of the order dtd. 
09.10.2023 passed by a two-Judge Bench of this Court, whereby the 
Petitioner’s writ petition was allowed and medical termination of her 
pregnancy was permitted, on the ground that one of the doctors on 
the Medical Board emailed the ASG, seeking a clarifi cation of that 
445
order – Nature of the jurisdiction under which the present case is 
being adjudicated:
Held: Once a judgment or order attains fi nality, a party seeking to 
challenge the decision rendered may do so only by invoking the jurisdiction 
of the 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.