HC stresses consent in Punjab woman’s abortion plea
Her willingness and consent are all that matter, says HC on Punjab woman’s abortion plea
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that the willingness and consent of a married woman are the only factors that matter when deciding whether she can undergo an abortion. The court made this observation while allowing a 21-year-old woman from Punjab to terminate her pregnancy without the consent of her husband. The judgment clearly stated that the law does not require a husband’s approval for medical termination of pregnancy.
The case was heard by a bench led by Justice Suvir Sehgal. The woman had approached the High Court seeking permission to terminate her pregnancy in the second trimester. After examining medical and legal aspects, the court found no obstacle in granting her request and directed that the abortion be carried out at an authorised medical facility.
Case background and medical findings
The petitioner told the court that she was married on May 2, 2025, but her relationship with her husband had been troubled since the beginning. She said she was facing serious marital issues and was currently involved in divorce proceedings. Due to the emotional stress and instability in her personal life, she expressed her unwillingness to continue with the pregnancy.
During an earlier hearing, the High Court had directed the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, to constitute a medical board to examine the woman. The board was asked to assess her physical and mental fitness for undergoing medical termination of pregnancy.
ALSO READ: Is low ovarian reserve normal in your 20s or 30s? Fertility expert answers
The medical board examined the petitioner and submitted its report to the court on December 23. According to the report, the woman was medically fit to undergo the procedure. The report stated that there was a single live intra-uterine foetus with a gestational age of 16 weeks and one day. Importantly, the report confirmed that there were no congenital abnormalities in the foetus.
The medical board also evaluated the woman’s mental health. It noted that she had been suffering from symptoms of depression and anxiety for the past six months and had been receiving psychiatric treatment, though with limited improvement. The board observed that the woman was severely distressed about her pregnancy, especially because of the ongoing divorce proceedings. However, the experts concluded that she was psychologically fit to give informed consent for the abortion and should continue with counselling and psychiatric care.
Based on this medical assessment, the court observed that the petitioner was in a suitable physical and mental condition to undergo termination of pregnancy under medical supervision.
Court’s view on consent and legal position
After reviewing the medical report, the High Court addressed the key legal question in the case: whether the consent of the woman’s estranged husband was required for terminating the pregnancy. The court made it clear that the answer was no.
Justice Suvir Sehgal pointed out that the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971, does not require the consent of a husband, either expressly or implicitly. The law recognises the pregnant woman as the primary decision-maker when it comes to her body and her pregnancy.
The court emphasised that a married woman is fully capable of deciding whether she wants to continue with a pregnancy or terminate it. It observed that forcing a woman to seek her husband’s consent would go against her personal autonomy and dignity.
“A married lady is the best judge to evaluate as to whether she intends to continue with pregnancy or get it aborted. Her willingness and consent is all that matters,” the court stated in its order.
The bench also noted that the gestational age of the foetus was less than 20 weeks, which falls within the permissible limit under the MTP Act. Since the pregnancy was legally eligible for termination and the woman was medically fit, the court found no legal or medical barrier to granting permission.
In its final order, passed on December 24, the High Court allowed the plea and directed that the petitioner could undergo medical termination of pregnancy at PGIMER, Chandigarh, or at any other authorised hospital. The court instructed the hospital authorities to take all necessary care and precautions while carrying out the procedure.
The court further directed the woman to get the abortion done within one week from the date of the order. With these directions, the High Court disposed of the petition.
The ruling is significant as it strongly reinforces the principle of bodily autonomy for women. It sends a clear message that a woman’s choice regarding her pregnancy cannot be overridden by marital status or spousal disagreement. Legal experts say the judgment aligns with earlier Supreme Court rulings that recognise reproductive choice as a fundamental right linked to personal liberty and privacy.
By placing the woman’s consent at the centre of the decision-making process, the court has once again underlined that reproductive rights belong to the woman alone. The judgment is expected to serve as an important reference in similar cases where women face pressure or opposition while seeking abortion services.
Related News
