Delhi HC permits IVF procedure for Indian army soldier in vegetative state

The Delhi High Court has permitted the continuation of IVF procedure for an Army soldier, who is in a persistent vegetative state with no foreseeable scope of neurological recovery in the near future.

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav stated that the soldier’s earlier consent, which was given when he started the IVF procedure, was sufficient even at this stage, and the consent of the wife would be treated as valid consent on his behalf for the purposes of the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act.

The court passed the order on a petition by the wife of the personnel, who sought directions for the extraction and cryopreservation of her husband’s genetic material for IVF. The petitioner said that in June 2023, the couple opted for an IVF procedure to conceive a child but in July 2025, the husband fell from a considerable height while patrolling, which resulted in severe traumatic brain injury.

Subsequently, while the soldier was undergoing treatment at the army hospital, the IVF treatment of the couple was stopped, and the petitioner approached the court, asserting her right to motherhood, dignity, and reproductive autonomy under the Constitution.

In the judgement passed on April 13, the court observed that the petitioner and her husband had volunteered for the IVF treatment and there was no material on record or any indication to show that the husband had not consented.

The court thus opined that although there was no express indication of consent from the petitioner’s husband at this stage, it was only “fair, reasonable, and just” for the authorities to take steps to take the IVF procedure to its logical end.

“But for this, the original consent given by the petitioner’s husband shall stand vitiated, and the very purpose for acceding to the IVF treatment shall be rendered otiose,” the court said.

“It is trite law, that procedure is indeed the handmaiden of justice. Non-compliance with the bare, strict, text of a procedural provision, destroying the substantive intent of the legislation ought not to be countenanced. The right to reproductive autonomy, it must be remembered, is a fundamental right. The ART Act must be so interpreted which furthers the said right, and not derogates from it,” observed the court.

With respect to the opinion of the army hospital’s medical board that the possibility of retrieving viable sperm was “meagre” in this case, the court remarked that whether the petitioner would beget a child was “not in human hands”.

“It is destiny that determines whether or not the fortune of parenthood shall get bestowed upon persons. This Court ought not to interdict the fate of the petitioner by insisting from Mr. Kumar, that which is physically impossible and impracticable,” it said.

“A living being obtains a body under the supervision of Daiva”, the court quoted from the Bhagavata Purana in its judgement, as it directed that “the petitioner’s husband action and his consent of joining the IVF treatment be treated to be sufficient compliance for the purposes of Section 22 (Written informed consent) of the ART Act.”

The court clarified that the authorities shall not disentitle the petitioner on the sole ground that the petitioner’s husband’s written consent was absent.

The petitioner’s consent will be considered as valid consent for her husband for any procedure related to the IVF, it said.