The Bombay High Court delivered an important decision, stating that hospitals cannot refuse medical treatment to pregnant minors in the absence of a police report. The decision came in response to a case involving a 17-year-old pregnant girl who elected not to file criminal charges against her underage partner, claiming their mutual relationship.
Justices GS Kulkarni and Firdosh Pooniwalla issued the observation, mentioning that hospitals cannot demand the filing of a criminal complaint as a condition for providing medical care to pregnant minors. The decision, which was delivered on April 10, underlines the significance of protecting the fundamental right to life, as given in Article 21 of the Constitution.
The case highlighted the complexities surrounding sexual relations involving minors in India. As per statutory rape laws, such relationships are illegal, particularly when involving an adult and a minor. But in this case, both individuals were minors. Additionally, the minor girl refused to reveal her partner's identity and claimed that their relationship was consensual. Because of her declaration, no criminal charges have been filed against her partner.
Despite these circumstances, hospitals and medical clinics insisted on the submission of a police complaint before providing medical assistance to the pregnant girl. Consequently, the girl filed a petition through her father before the High Court seeking relief, arguing for the protection of her rights under Article 21.
In response, government lawyer Poornima Kantharia informed the court that the girl may receive medical care at the state-run JJ Hospital without sharing her identity. However, the state lawyer suggested that the young girl produce a formal statement explaining her decision not to file a police report. This statement, similar to an Emergency Police Report (EPR), will be kept confidential unless forced by court order.
The court approved of this approach, directing the petitioner's lawyers to provide the statement to Kantharia for preservation. Additionally, the dean of JJ Hospital was instructed to ensure confidentiality and provide comprehensive medical care during the girl's pregnancy and post-delivery period.
The decision highlights how essential medical assistance is to the right to life, ensuring that people in need, such as minors who are pregnant, have access to healthcare. It supports the concept that no one should be denied access to medical care, especially when it comes to their health and welfare.
The state was represented by government leader Poornima Kantharia and additional government leader Pooja Patil, while advocates Nigel Quraishy and Dhananjay Deshmukh represented the petitioner.
The Bombay High Court's decision highlights the importance of giving medical aid without imposing unnecessary conditions and creates an example of prioritizing the health and welfare of pregnant teenagers.
(Input from various resources)
(Rehash/Susmita Bhandary/MSM)
