Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The aim to enshrine the right to abortion in the French Constitution which gained impetus after SCOTUS overruled Roe v. Wade in 2022 was finally fulfilled with 780 MPs favouring the inclusion.
The Court also peremptorily directed the parents to ensure that the minor brother against whom allegations were made for impregnating his minor sister was not allowed anywhere near her or to have access to her in any manner.
The woman had adopted Lactational Amenorrhea Method (‘LAM’), a process which implies absence of menstruation due to continuing breast feeding as a contraceptive method.
“माता के समान कोई छाया नहीं, कोई आश्रय नहीं, कोई सुरक्षा नहीं। इस विश्व में माता के समान कोई जीवनदाता नहीं।”
Calcutta High Court commended the cooperation from all parties involved and expressed well wishes for the minor child’s future.
Madras High Court said there are instances where a minor and their guardian may not be interested in proceeding further with the case and entangle themselves in a legal process. In such instances, termination of pregnancy can be made without the disclosure of the name of the minor.
“When a minor seeks a medical termination of pregnancy, doctors must ensure that the process is conducted in compliance with the prevailing laws and regulations, with utmost sensitivity to the minor’s age and maturity level.”
Kerala High Court expressed that this happened because of the lack of knowledge about the safe sex. Minor children are in front of ‘internet’ and ‘google search’. There is no guidance for the children.
The Court also directed the Medical Panel to conduct an ossification test of the minor.
Considering the fact that various social and medical complications are likely to arise since the child will be born from the girl's own sibling, Kerala High Court found the permission sought for termination of pregnancy to be inevitable.
The attitude towards early love relationships, especially adolescent love, had to be scrutinized in the backdrop of their real-life situations to understand their actions in each situation because the teenagers who try to imitate romantic culture of films and novels, remain unaware about the laws and the age of consent.
The Delhi High Court allowed termination of 28 weeks pregnancy of a woman as the Medical Board from AIIMS diagnosed some “substantial abnormalities” in the foetus.
This roundup revisits the analyses of Supreme Court’s judgments/orders on validity of AIBE; ex-communication of Dawoodi Bohras; decriminalisation of adultery; permissibility of DNA test of children to prove allegations of adultery; and more. It also covers reports on the career trajectory & important decisions of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Dutta and the newly appointed 7 judges of the Supreme Court; Explainers on important law points; and Cases Reported in SCC Weekly in the month of February.
The Delhi High Court allowed termination of pregnancy of around 25 weeks of a minor child and further directed the SHO concerned to ensure that after the medical termination and the period of rest, the minor child was admitted to a Government school, so she could continue studying further.
Bombay High Court upheld the petitioner's right to choose termination of pregnancy. ‘The Court considers this petition as an appeal not only to the judicial mind, but to the moral conscience that must accompany it.'
Delhi High Court: In a case filed seeking termination of pregnancy under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (MTP
Punjab and Haryana High Court: While deciding the writ petition, a bench of Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J., directed the Medical Board to
Bombay High Court: In an appeal filed by husband challenging the judgment and decree of restitution of conjugal rights and
“The nature of sexual violence and the contours of consent do not undergo a transformation when one decides to marry. The institution of marriage does not influence the answer to the question of whether a woman has consented to sexual relations. If the woman is in an abusive relationship, she may face great difficulty in accessing medical resources or consulting doctors.”
While the interim order was passed in the case on 21.07.2022, the Supreme Court took over two months to write a far-reaching 75-pages-long verdict, touching upon various aspects like purposive interpretation of Medical Termination of Pregnancy laws, equal status of married and unmarried or single women, right to reproductive autonomy, right to dignity, effect of unwanted pregnancy on mental health of women, etc.