38.6c New Delhi, India, Tuesday, December 09, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Madras HC Seeks Response From Centre, State On Extending Gestation Period For Terminating Pregnancies

By LawStreet News Network      26 April, 2019 12:00 AM      0 Comments
Madras HC Seeks Response From Centre, State On Extending Gestation Period For Terminating Pregnancies

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on April 25, 2019, issued notices to the Centre and the state government seeking their response on extending the gestation period for termination of pregnancy from 20 weeks to 24 weeks, as per a 2014 proposal.

A Division Bench of Justices N. Kirubakaran and S.S. Sundar observed that it was a matter of urgency for the Central government to come out with a time frame by which the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 could be amended to extend the permissible termination period.

The court initiated a suo motu PIL after taking cognizance of a report by WHO-MOD (World Health Organisation and March of Dimes) which pointed out that 2.70 crore children were born in India every year, of which 17 lakh were born with abnormalities found in the fetus itself.

The Bench taking serious note of the inordinate delay in framing amendments to existing statutes gave Centre two months to respond and adjourned the matter to June 24, 2019.

As per Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, women are allowed to abort fetuses up to 20-weeks-old and beyond that period, the permission of a High Court is required. The Bill that is pending in Parliament proposes to amend the Act to extend the legally permissible period to end a pregnancy to 24 weeks.

The court took note of women or girls who conceive after being raped and said extending the period from 20 weeks to 24 weeks was necessary as it would avoid unwanted pregnancies. In the interest of the children, women and future generation, the amendment is necessary, the court said.

The Bench also said that doctors were finding it very difficult to diagnose the abnormalities in the fetus within 20 weeks as the cases are reported late, especially in rural areas. The court said establishing neo-natal care and advanced scan centres by the respective State Governments as well as Central Government are necessary.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

sc-questions-precedent-on-contractual-bars-to-arbitration-claims-refers-bharat-drilling-to-larger-bench
Trending Judiciary
SC Questions Precedent on Contractual Bars to Arbitration Claims, Refers ‘Bharat Drilling’ to Larger Bench [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court refers the 2009 Bharat Drilling ruling to a larger bench, questioning its use in interpreting contractual bars on arbitration claims.

08 December, 2025 04:45 PM
j-and-k-high-court-upholds-dismissal-of-injunction-plea-in-agrarian-reforms-dispute
Trending Judiciary
J&K High Court Upholds Dismissal of Injunction Plea in Agrarian Reforms Dispute [Read Order]

J&K High Court upholds dismissal of injunction plea, ruling that agrarian disputes fall under Agrarian Reforms Act authorities, not civil courts.

08 December, 2025 05:21 PM

TOP STORIES

hostile-india-china-ties-no-extradition-treaty-allahabad-hc-denies-bail-to-chinese-national-in-visa-forgery-case
Trending Judiciary
Hostile India–China Ties, No Extradition Treaty: Allahabad HC Denies Bail to Chinese National in Visa Forgery Case [Read Order]

Allahabad High Court denies bail to a Chinese national accused of visa tampering and forging Indian IDs, citing hostile India–China ties and no extradition treaty.

03 December, 2025 12:53 AM
attachment-before-judgment-cannot-cover-property-sold-prior-to-suit-filing-sc
Trending Judiciary
Attachment Before Judgment Cannot Cover Property Sold Prior to Suit Filing: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court holds that property transferred before a suit cannot be attached under Order 38 Rule 5; fraud allegations must be pursued separately under Section 53 TP Act.

03 December, 2025 01:30 AM
sc-holds-no-review-or-appeal-maintainable-against-order-appointing-arbitrator
Trending Judiciary
SC Holds No Review Or Appeal Maintainable Against Order Appointing Arbitrator [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules that no review, recall or appeal lies against a Section 11 arbitrator appointment order, reaffirming minimal judicial interference in arbitration.

03 December, 2025 01:40 AM
partner-cannot-invoke-arbitration-clause-without-express-authorisation-of-other-partners-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Partner Cannot Invoke Arbitration Clause Without Express Authorisation of Other Partners: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Kerala High Court rules that a partner cannot invoke an arbitration clause or seek appointment of an arbitrator without express authorisation from co-partners.

03 December, 2025 05:19 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email