Allowed

Xyz v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Principal Secretary and Anr.

Bombay HC27 Sept 2021WP/5417/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a single day hearing regarding medical termination of pregnancy, the High Court directed a medical board examination at Satara Hospital. Upon receiving the board's report confirming congenital cardiac anomalies, the Court granted the petitioner liberty to undergo the procedure before the Civil Hospital at Satara before subsequently disposing of the petition. This case is notably cited for the s

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioner to undergo medical termination of pregnancy at Civil Hospital, Satara, based on the medical board's report.

Xyz Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Principal Secretary… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2021)

hcs

1/2

5.w5417.21.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.5417 OF 2021

¶6

X Y Z … Petitioner

¶7

V/s.

¶8

State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents

¶9

Mrs.Rachita A. Padwal for the Petitioner. Mrs.Ashwini Purav for Respondent No.1 – State. Ms.Neeta V. Masurkar for Respondent No.2.

¶10

CORAM: UJJAL BHUYAN AND MADHAV JAMDAR, JJ.

¶11

DATE : 27TH SEPTEMBER, 2021.

¶12

P.C:-

¶13

Heard Ms.Rachita Padwal, learned Counsel for the Petitioner; and Mrs.Ashwini Purav, learned AGP for Respondent No.1 – State. We have also heard Ms.Neeta Masurkar, learned Counsel for Respondent No.2.

¶14

On 9/09/2021 the following order was passed :

¶15

“2. Petitioner seeks medical termination of her pregnancy on the ground that the fetus which is stated to be in its 22nd week suffers from serious abnormalities.

¶16

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the materials on record, we direct Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Satara to constitute a medical board for examination of the petitioner.

¶17

Petitioner shall report before the medical board within 48 hours.

¶18

Medical board shall submit a report in sealed cover on or before the next date.

¶19

Stand over to 17.09.2021.”

hcs

2/2

5.w5417.21.doc

Thereafter when the matter was heard on 17/09/2021 the following order came to be passed :

¶24

“3. Today when the matter is called upon learned AGP has placed before us report of the medical board dated 14^th September, 2021 submitted by the Civil Hospital, Satara. Medical board has opined that ultrasound findings indicate congenital cardiac anomalies in the fetus. Accordingly medical board has recommended medical termination of pregnancy.

¶25

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on going through the materials on record including the report of the medical board we grant liberty to the petitioner to undergo medical termination of her pregnancy in the Civil Hospital at Satara. Outcome of the procedure be informed to us on the next date.

¶26

Stand over to 27^th September, 2021.”

¶27

Today, when the matter is called upon learned AGP has placed before us a letter dated 24/09/2021 issued by the Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Satara to the Registrar of this Court informing that medical termination of pregnancy of the Petitioner was successfully carried out on 22/09/2021.

¶28

That being the position no further order is called or.

¶29

Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶30

[MADHAV JAMDAR, J.]

¶31

[UJJAL BHUYAN, J.]

Xyz v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Principal Secretary and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Xyz v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Principal Secretary and Anr.

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

Punjabrao Appasaheb Pol Vs the Assistant Registrar and Ors.

Xyz Vs the Dean of B.J Government Medical College Ans Sasson Hospital Pune

Punjabrao Appasaheb Pol Vs the Assistant Registrar and Ors.

Xyz Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Principal Secretary and Anr.

Maharashtra State Amateur Aquatic Association Thro.Secretary Rajendra Y. Palkar Vs Union of India Throu. Minnistry of Youth Affairs and Sport Department of Sports

Haidry Jama Masjid Trust Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.