Consent of husband not needed for abortion: SC

Husband can’t force wife to continue pregnancy

A woman, on her own, can give consent for aborting an unwanted child and her husband cannot force her to continue an unwanted pregnancy, the Supreme Court said on Friday, upholding a woman’s legal right to conceive, continue a pregnancy and give birth to a child.

A bench, headed by CJI Dipak Misra, declined to interfere with a judgment of the Punjab and Haryana HC holding that consent is required only of the woman undergoing abortion.

Offering relief to a married woman from Haryana, Seema Malhotra, who was dragged to court by her husband over an abortion-related matter, the apex court noted that “a woman is not a machine in which raw material is put and a finished product comes out. She should be mentally prepared to conceive, continue the same and give birth to a child”.

The Supreme Court on Friday declined to interfere with a judgment of the Punjab and Haryana high court holding that consent is required only of the woman undergoing medical termination of pregnancy, and the husband cannot force his wife to continue an unwanted pregnancy.

The high court in 2011, while rejecting the husband’s plea for `30 lakh damages from wife, doctors, her parents and brother, had also held that “a woman is not a machine in which raw material is put and a finished product comes out. She should be mentally prepared to conceive, continue the same and give birth to a child”.

A three-judge bench of

Supreme Court declined to interfere with a judgment that consent is required only of the woman undergoing medical termination of pregnancy

Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A.M. Kanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud while agreeing with the high court’s judgment dismissed the appeal filed by the husband Anil Kumar Malhotra challenging this judgment.

The CJI told the counsel for Mr Malhotra that as abortion was conducted by the doctors with the consent of the woman, there is no question of damages. The CJI noted that as per the law, only the woman’s consent is required and she is entitled to say that she did not want to bear the child of the husband. In a lighter vein, the CJI told the counsel for Mr Malhotra, “Let him (husband) sit under a tree and meditate.” In this case, Seema Malhotra was married to Anil Kumar Malhotra on April 17, 1994. Out of the wedlock, a male child was born on February 14, 1995. The parties resided at Panipat in Haryana. Due to the hostilities and strained relations between the parties, Seema Malhotra and her minor son had been staying with her parents at Chandigarh since 1999.

Seema Malhotra filed an application under Section 125 CrPC, claiming maintenance from the husband, Anil Kumar Malhotra.