Allowed

Swati Sunil Rathod v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC13 Jan 2021WP/215/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court permitted the petitioner to terminate a pregnancy at a government-recognized centre. The decision was based on an expert committee report confirming fetal demise, despite the committee noting that the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act did not apply to this specific medical indication.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to terminate the pregnancy at a Government recognized centre.

Swati Sunil Rathod Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

1055mtp-20

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 215 OF 2021

¶4

Swati Sunil Rathod Versus

¶5

The State of Maharashtra and another

¶6

...Petitioner

¶7

... Respondents

¶8

Mr. Deshpande Shantanu A. Advocate for the petitioner Mr. S. N.Kendre, A.G.P. for the respondents.

¶9

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &

¶10

SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ. DATE : 13th January, 2021.

¶11

ORDER :

¶12

The petitioner seeks permission to terminate the pregnancy.

¶13

The petitioner was referred to the expert Committee at

¶14

Government Medical College and Hospital, Aurangabad. The expert Committee examined the petitioner and submitted the report. The report reads thus:

¶15

"Procedure for examination

¶16

Date and time of commencement of examiantion : 12.01.2021

¶17

at 2.00 p.m.

¶18

Review of available reports and investigations by:

¶19

Sr. No.	Report revewed	Opinion on the findings
1

¶20

Examination of girl/women done by :All members of committee

¶21

Counseling done by: Dr. Pradip Deshmukh, Asst. Professor,

¶22

Psychiasgtry.

¶23

Investigations done:

¶24

Page 1 of 3

¶25

1055mtp-20

¶26

Sr.No.	Investigations Done	Keyfindings
1.	CBC, URINE ROUTINE	Hb-9.8gm% Urine routine- WNL
2.	USG	Single Intrauterine fetal demise
		of gestational age 20 weeks and
		2 days having absent cardiac
		activity, Spalding sin with / open
		neural tube defect.

¶27

Additional findings and observations: N.A.

¶28

Physical fitness for termination: Yes

¶29

A. yes

¶30

B. No

¶31

Recommendations by Medical Board for termination: Recommended by Medical method. Surgical intervention and blood transfusion may be required. The risk involved in the said procedure is explained to the patient and her husband. Otherwise also termination is indicated on medical ground. MTP act does not apply. Patient advised admission immediately.

¶32

Date and Time: 12.01.2021 at 2:30 p.m.".

¶33

The expert committee has recommended termination of pregnancy of petitioner. The termination is recommended by medical method. The expert committee has opined that surgical intervention and blood transfusion may be required. Risk involved is explained to the petitioner and her husband.

¶34

Mr. Deshpande, the learned counsel submits that risk involved in

¶35

Page 2 of 3

¶36

1055mtp-20

¶37

termination of pregnancy is apprised to the petitioner and the petitioner wants to terminate the pregnancy.

¶38

In light of the report, the petitioner is permitted to terminate the pregnancy at Government recognized centre.

¶39

Writ petition disposed of. No costs.

¶40

(SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.)

¶41

JPC

¶42

Page 3 of 3

Swati Sunil Rathod v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swati Sunil Rathod v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukta Ram Budhware Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bhagwath Shankar Ambatwad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Neha Nandkumar Govindwar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Laxman Balaji Koli and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Mahavir Ginning Factory Prop Gangwal Manikchand Madanlal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bhagyashri Ramkrishna Botle Alias Bhagirathi Sonerao Chitampalle Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others