Sonali Rahul Pawar And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 wp 13203.19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 13203 OF 2019 Sonali Rahul Pawar and another .. Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents Shri Sushant B. Choudhari, Advocate for Petitioners. Shri S. B. Yawalkar, Addl.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. CORAM :

S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND K. K. SONAWANE, JJ.

DATE :

22TH OCTOBER, 2019.

FINAL ORDER :

.

The petitioner No. 1 seeks permission to terminate the pregnancy. The petitioner No. 1 was referred to the Committee, Constituted by the Dean, Government Medical College and Hospital, Aurangabad. The Expert Committee has examined the petitioner No. 1 and submitted the report. The report reads thus :

The committee has thoroughly examined Sonali Rahul Pawar on 19.10.2019 and the report of her ultrasonography done at GMCH Aurangabad on date : 19.10.2019. Following findings are noted :

A.

Length of Pregnancy : Gestational Age of 21 weeks 01 days.

B.

Single live intra-uterine fetus with Dilated bilateral lateral ventrical, small posterior fossa with descent of posterior fossa structure in to foramen

2 wp 13203.19 magnum, positive lemon sign and myelomeningocele in lumbosacral region suggestive of Arnold chiari type II malformation.

Taking into consideration the above findings there is evidence of substantial risk to the fetus if born. Hence this Committee recommends termination of pregnancy. Pregnancy can be terminated at Government recognized centre of choice of patient with due risk to mother and the risk is explained to her and her relatives.

2.

The Committee has observed that, there is evidence of substantial risk to the fetus if born. The committee recommends termination of pregnancy.

3.

The report also suggest that, the petitioners are informed about the risk involved in termination of pregnancy. The learned counsel for petitioners submits that, both the petitioners are explained about the risk involved in the termination of pregnancy and they would like to proceed further with the termination of pregnancy of the petitioner No. 1. 4.

In the light of the above, the petitioner No. 1 is permitted to terminate the pregnancy at Government recognized centre. 5.

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

[K. K. SONAWANE, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] bsb/Oct. 19