ETV Bharat / state

SC displeased over Gujarat HC adjourning rape survivor's pregnancy termination plea, says valuable time lost

author img

By

Published : Aug 19, 2023, 1:49 PM IST

Updated : Aug 19, 2023, 4:13 PM IST

After Gujarat HC adjourned a case of termination of pregnancy for close to two weeks, the Supreme Court said that there must be some sense of urgency in such matters. -- Reports ETV Bharat's Sumit Saxena.

‘Should be a sense of urgency, not lackadaisical approach’, SC on Gujarat HC deferring termination of pregnancy plea
Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Saturday castigated the Gujarat High Court for adjourning a case of termination of pregnancy for close to two weeks, saying “there has to be some sense of urgency in such matters. There can't be such a lackadaisical approach…”.

In a special sitting, a bench comprising justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan noted the petitioner’s counsel's contention that the petition was filed before the high court on August 7, 2023, and it was taken up for hearing on August 8, and a direction was passed to constitute a medical board to ascertain the health of the petitioner. The counsel contended that on August 11, a report was submitted by the medical superintendent.

Justice Nagarathna said strangely the high court listed the matter on August 23, losing sight of the fact that in such matters every day is crucial and when the petitioner approached the high court, she was already 26 weeks pregnant. The bench noted that the petitioner’s plea was rejected by the high court on August 17, and expressed its discontent that no reasons were provided by the high court nor the order has been uploaded so far. “Valuable time has been lost since August 11, till today….”, said Justice Nagarathna.

Justice Nagarathna said the apex court would have to wait for the high court order to be uploaded and noted, “How can we decide on the correctness of the order if the order (passed by the high court) isn't there?.....12 valuable days have been lost”. The top court issued notice on the petitioner’s plea seeking termination of pregnancy and the notice was accepted by advocate Swati Ghildiyal, representing the Gujarat government, present before the court.

Justice Nagarathna said, “There has to be some sense of urgency in such matters. There can't be such a lackadaisical approach... we're sorry to make these remarks”, and directed the listing of the matter on Monday. The petitioner’s counsel urged the court to seek a fresh medical report. The bench noted that the petitioner’s counsel says that she is pregnant for 27 weeks and 2 days and will be shortly approaching 28 weeks.

The top court directed that a fresh medical report should be submitted by the medical board after examining the petitioner once again. The bench said the latest report should be submitted to the court by tomorrow evening.

"We direct the petitioner to appear before KMCRI to be examined once again and the latest status report may be submitted to this court by tomorrow evening by 6 PM. The same shall be put up before this court on Monday. The matter shall be taken as the first item on board”, said the top court.

The petitioner has alleged rape. According to a counsel familiar with the case, the petitioner was in a relationship with a man and later she found out that he was already married. Therefore, she is alleging that her consent was vitiated.

Also read: SC directs CIC, SIC to ensure proper implementation of RTI Section 4

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Saturday castigated the Gujarat High Court for adjourning a case of termination of pregnancy for close to two weeks, saying “there has to be some sense of urgency in such matters. There can't be such a lackadaisical approach…”.

In a special sitting, a bench comprising justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan noted the petitioner’s counsel's contention that the petition was filed before the high court on August 7, 2023, and it was taken up for hearing on August 8, and a direction was passed to constitute a medical board to ascertain the health of the petitioner. The counsel contended that on August 11, a report was submitted by the medical superintendent.

Justice Nagarathna said strangely the high court listed the matter on August 23, losing sight of the fact that in such matters every day is crucial and when the petitioner approached the high court, she was already 26 weeks pregnant. The bench noted that the petitioner’s plea was rejected by the high court on August 17, and expressed its discontent that no reasons were provided by the high court nor the order has been uploaded so far. “Valuable time has been lost since August 11, till today….”, said Justice Nagarathna.

Justice Nagarathna said the apex court would have to wait for the high court order to be uploaded and noted, “How can we decide on the correctness of the order if the order (passed by the high court) isn't there?.....12 valuable days have been lost”. The top court issued notice on the petitioner’s plea seeking termination of pregnancy and the notice was accepted by advocate Swati Ghildiyal, representing the Gujarat government, present before the court.

Justice Nagarathna said, “There has to be some sense of urgency in such matters. There can't be such a lackadaisical approach... we're sorry to make these remarks”, and directed the listing of the matter on Monday. The petitioner’s counsel urged the court to seek a fresh medical report. The bench noted that the petitioner’s counsel says that she is pregnant for 27 weeks and 2 days and will be shortly approaching 28 weeks.

The top court directed that a fresh medical report should be submitted by the medical board after examining the petitioner once again. The bench said the latest report should be submitted to the court by tomorrow evening.

"We direct the petitioner to appear before KMCRI to be examined once again and the latest status report may be submitted to this court by tomorrow evening by 6 PM. The same shall be put up before this court on Monday. The matter shall be taken as the first item on board”, said the top court.

The petitioner has alleged rape. According to a counsel familiar with the case, the petitioner was in a relationship with a man and later she found out that he was already married. Therefore, she is alleging that her consent was vitiated.

Also read: SC directs CIC, SIC to ensure proper implementation of RTI Section 4

Last Updated : Aug 19, 2023, 4:13 PM IST

For All Latest Updates

TAGGED:

ETV Bharat Logo

Copyright © 2024 Ushodaya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., All Rights Reserved.