Rupal Roshan Ghumde And Another v. Union Of India And Others

{1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6301 OF 2020 Rupal w/o Roshan Ghumde & another Petitioners

Versus

Union of India & others Respondents Mr.Rupesh A. Jaiswal, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.S.S.Dhongade, Standing Counsel for Respondents No.1 & 2. Mr.A.B.Chate, AGP for Respondents No.3 & 4.

CORAM : DIPANKAR DATTA, C.J. & S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.

DATE : SEPTEMBER 18, 2020.

PC :

Petitioner no.1 seeks permission to terminate her pregnancy.

Petitioner no.1 was referred to the Expert Committee at Government Medical College & Hospital, Aurangabad. The Expert Committee examined petitioner no.1 and submitted its report. The report reads thus:

"12 Investigations done:

{2} Sr.No.

Investigations done Key Findings O1 CBC, URINE ROUTINE WNL USG SINGLE LIVE INTRAUTERINE GESTATION OF AGE 23 WEEKS 3 DAYS WITH NO ANOMALY NOTED AT PRESENT SCAN.

Additional fndings and observations: Amniocentesis done at K Pond Children's Super Speciality Hospital. On amniocentesis fetus is likely to be afected with spinal muscular atrophy, due to the homozygous deletion of exon 7 and 8 on SMN1 GENE.

Physical Fitness for termination:

Yes.

Recommendations by Medical Board for termination: There is a substantial risk to the foetus if born.

Recommended: She is a case of previous Caesarean section. There is a possibility of need of a Caesarean section again this time during termination. The said risk is more and above the usual risk involved. The risk involved has been explained to the patient and her husband. The Expert Committee has recommended medical termination of pregnancy of petitioner no.1. It is further opined that there is substantial risk to the foetus, if born. She is a case of Caesarean section. The Expert Committee has further opined that there is possibility of need of a Caesarean section again this time during termination. The said risk is more and above the usual risk involved. The risk involved has been explained to

{3} petitioners no.1 and 2.

The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are explained about the risk involved and petitioner no.1 wants to proceed further with the termination of pregnancy. In the light of that, petitioner no.1 is permitted to terminate her pregnancy at Government recognised Centre. Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Copy of this order, duly authenticated by the Sheristedar of this Court, may be supplied to the learned Counsel for the petitioners.

(S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE) adb