SC verdict on unmarried women is historic, says SC lawyer Amit Mishra

Dr. Amit Mishra, advocate at Supreme Court and petitioner's advocate in the matter talked to ETV Bharat's Maitrie Jha and described the verdict as path-breaking and said now unmarried women will have access to safe abortion.

New Delhi: In a path-breaking judgment on Thursday, the Supreme Court of India ruled that unmarried women can also abort their pregnancy in the 20-24 weeks of term and it's the woman's reproductive autonomy to choose abortion.

The bench comprising of Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice AS Bopanna, and Justice JB Pardiwala delivered the verdict on a petition filed by a 23.5 weeks pregnant unmarried woman who did not wish to continue the pregnancy as her partner had refused to marry her and she lacked the financial resources.

Earlier, she had approached the Delhi High Court which had refused to grant her relief as her condition was not covered under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act. Later on, she approached the top court which on 21st July allowed her to terminate her pregnancy subject to approval by the medical board of AIIMS.

Commenting on this verdict, Dr. Amit Mishra, advocate at Supreme Court and petitioner's advocate in the matter talked to ETV Bharat regarding the case.

Calling the judgment "historic", Mishra explained that through the judgment there have been two changes that are brought out. One, the definition of the rape victim has been widened and has included marital rape in Rule 3B(a) and two, unmarried and deserted/abandoned women are included in Rule 3B(c).

He explained that the MTP Act came in 1971, and in 2021 it was amended, and live-in relationships in terms of pregnancy were recognized for the first time. Through another amendment in the same year, unmarried women were allowed to terminate pregnancy till 20 weeks and women falling under the vulnerable sections like a rape victim, widow, divorcee, minor, mentally ill, etc were allowed to terminate even in 20-24 weeks term.

"Partner word was introduced in place of husband but only 20 weeks were allowed," said Mishra. On being asked why there was a distinction between married and unmarried women's termination terms, Mishra said that it wasn't intentional but the grey area was left out while amending. In the case before the court, the central government supported the petition.

Talking about the impact of the judgment, Mishra said that MTP's objective was to provide "access to safe abortion and if unmarried women do not get right they will go to unsafe place".

"Health issue may arise, it can lead to death also and maternal mortality ratio will go high," said Mishra. He said that now with the judgment unmarried women will have access to safe health care, MMR will go down and the objective of MTP will be attained.

On being asked about recognizing marital rape in the judgment, Mishra said that the question of its legality under Section 375 is still pending before the top court and marital rape will only be recognized in terms of MTP presently.

"Court has also said that women need not prove, give evidence, it is her body, she has to carry for 9 months. Court has said that there may be several factors, economic, financial, and social. No one can question her on why is she doing it (terminating)," said Mishra.

Mishra said that marital rape is a reality, especially in rural areas where husbands and in-laws pressurize the women to continue the pregnancy and she has no choice but to continue.

The judgment of the Supreme Court coincided with International Safe Abortion Day. An observation regarding marital rape can be used in deciding the petition seeking recognition of marital rape which is pending before a different bench in the top court.