Mrs. X and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.
Background
A 22-year-old woman, whose fetus (then about 22-24 weeks old) had been diagnosed with bilateral renal agenesis (no kidneys) and anhydramnios (absence of amniotic fluid), approached the Supreme Court directly under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking permission to medically terminate her pregnancy beyond the time limits normally allowed by law. She feared the fetus had no chance of survival and that continuing the pregnancy could endanger her own life. The Court allowed her application to keep her and her co-petitioner's names confidential and directed that she be examined by a seven-member medical board at KEM Hospital, Mumbai.
Decision Breakdown
The medical board's report, which the Union of India's own expert did not dispute, confirmed the fetus had no kidneys, faced a high risk of death in the womb or shortly after birth, and had no available curative treatment, and that continuing the pregnancy risked the mother's physical and mental health. Relying on its own recent precedent recognising a woman's right to preserve her life and bodily integrity, and on the Supreme Court's earlier ruling in Suchita Srivastava vs. Chandigarh Administration that reproductive choice is part of personal liberty under Article 21, the Court held the case satisfied Section 3(2)(i) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (risk to life/grave injury to physical or mental health). It permitted the termination to be carried out at the same hospital under the medical board's supervision, while directing that the petitioner herself (not merely a doctor acting on her behalf) must swear an affidavit confirming her informed, voluntary consent before the procedure, since the Court found no evidence of coercion or incapacity after the board's psychiatric evaluation.
Lesson Learnt
Courts can permit termination of a pregnancy beyond the usual legal time limits where credible medical evidence shows a serious, otherwise-untreatable risk to the fetus's survival combined with a genuine risk to the mother's own life or health, but they will also insist on verified, voluntary consent directly from the woman herself before granting such relief.