A 66-year-old father, the adoptive parent of a 27-year-old woman with below-average intelligence, has approached the Bombay High Court seeking approval for medical termination of her pregnancy.
The woman, who is over 20 weeks pregnant, has refused to consent to the procedure and is not willing to disclose the identity of the father of the child prompting him to approach the court.
The Bench consisting of Justice Ravindra V Ghuge and Justice Rajesh S Patil criticized the parents for allowing the woman to be out late at night.
“What kind of parenting is this?” the Court questioned.
It eventually referred the case to the medical board at JJ Hospital for evaluation of the fetus.
Although the case was initially adjourned for January 6, the medical board requested more time for its assessment, prompting the Court to postpone the matter to January 8.
The petitioner, who adopted the woman in 1998 when she was just six months old, explained that medical reports over the years indicated that she has below-average intelligence.
He further claimed that the woman has several other mental disorders including border line personality disorders and depression. She is not only violent but is also in need of constant medication, it was contended.
He also claimed that she had been sexually active since the age of 13 or 14 and often ventures out at night without informing him only to return in the morning.
As per the plea, he learned of his daughter’s pregnancy only on November 26 when she was taken to a hospital for a routine check-up.
The father argued that due to his financial situation and old age, he is unable to support a child financially.
He also pointed out that his daughter, who is also unemployed, is incapable of caring for a newborn. Additionally, the father described her as not only intellectually disabled but also violent, requiring treatment for behavioral issues.
According to him, she is physically and mentally unfit to endure a pregnancy and he believes that terminating it would be in her best interest.
In addition to seeking permission for the medical termination of pregnancy, the petitioner also called for an investigation by the police into the circumstances surrounding the pregnancy.
The Bench was not impressed and criticised the petitioner for lax parenting and reminded the parents that they chose to adopt the woman and could not abdicate their responsibility simply because she was violent and uncooperative.
“You chose to be her parent,” the court stated.
The Court also rebuked the parents for not lodging a first information report (FIR) with the police despite knowing that their daughter is a special child.
When the petitioner explained that they had not filed an FIR due to the lack of consent from the daughter, the Court clarified that the consent of the woman was immaterial in filing an FIR since anyone can act as an informant.
Further, the Court addressed the father’s claim of financial constraints as a reason for seeking the medical termination of pregnancy.
“Not having money is no ground for termination of pregnancy,” the Court made it clear.
It also remarked that old age should not be considered a valid reason to terminate a pregnancy.
“If we all start thinking of old age, no one will give birth to any child,” the Court said.
On the other hand, the Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the State, argued that the woman is not intellectually disabled. She pointed out that the woman had completed her 12th grade at a regular school and had not consented to the termination procedure.
