The Supreme Court’s order on Wednesday allowing a 13-year-old rape survivor from Mumbai to abort her 32-week foetus has been termed historic as never before a foetus so advanced in growth has been terminated in the country.
The court directed the victim to get admitted at Sir JJ Hospital in Mumbai on Thursday and asked the hospital authorities to terminate the pregnancy on Friday.
Earlier, a medical board comprising doctors from the JJ Hospital submitted a report to the apex court giving the go-ahead for abortion. Buoyed by the report, the Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justices Amitava Roy and AM Khanwilkar agreed to make the concession for the 13-year-old girl considering the fact that she had suffered the trauma of rape and the subsequent agony of bearing a child at this young age.
However, the Centre, represented by Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar, was not in favour of the court creating a precedent by allowing abortion of a 32-week foetus. He pointed out a similar case from Chandigarh recently where a 10-year-old rape victim was disallowed to terminate her 32-week old foetus.
The Bench told Kumar that in that case the Medical Board had not sanctioned abortion apprehending harm to the mother.
However, in the present case, the doctors opined there was no risk for the victim in undergoing termination of pregnancy.
Under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, Section 3(2)(b) bars medical termination of foetus beyond 20 weeks of pregnancy. However, exceptions have been made in the past by the apex court by allowing abortion to take place in cases where the foetus was at 24th, 25th and even 27th week of pregnancy for varied reasons. In most cases, either the foetus suffered from incurable heart disease or an undeveloped skull.
The victim in the present case is a Class VII student who was raped by her father’s friend. The Bench while waiving off the legal bar for the victim, said, “Considering the age of the petitioner (girl), the trauma she suffered because of sexual abuse and the agony which she has undergone... we think it appropriate that the termination of pregnancy be allowed.”