NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India on Thursday issued a notice in a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with its earlier order allowing the medical termination of a 15-year-old minor's pregnancy. The court warned that contempt proceedings, including the framing of charges, could follow if its directions are not implemented promptly.
A Bench comprising B. V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan heard the plea filed by the minor's mother and directed the Union Health Secretary and the Director of All India Institute of Medical Sciences to appear via video conferencing on May 4. The Bench made it clear that compliance with its order is non-negotiable, stating that if the directive is not followed by the given deadline, the court would proceed to frame contempt charges after hearing the concerned officials.
The matter stems from the court's April 24 judgment, in which it overturned a decision by the Delhi High Court that had refused permission to terminate the minor's 28-week pregnancy. The apex court emphasized that the reproductive autonomy of the minor must be given the highest priority. It held that no court should compel a woman, particularly a minor, to carry a pregnancy to term against her will, as doing so would violate her decisional autonomy and subject her to severe mental, emotional, and physical distress.
The Bench also underscored that in cases involving unwanted pregnancies, constitutional courts must prioritize the welfare and choice of the pregnant individual over the interests of the unborn child. It noted that the minor had reportedly attempted suicide twice after discovering her pregnancy, and forcing her to continue would amount to a direct violation of her right to live with dignity.
Following this ruling, the court had directed that the termination be conducted at AIIMS with all necessary medical safeguards. However, AIIMS subsequently filed a review petition challenging the order. The Supreme Court dismissed this plea sharply, criticizing the institution for attempting to evade compliance and stating that such actions undermine the constitutional rights of the minor involved. (IANS)