What did the Supreme Court say on abortion, marital rape, and ‘individuals aside from cis-women’

By Online Desk

In a landmark ruling on the reproductive rights of ladies, the Supreme Court held on Thursday that each one girls are entitled to secure and authorized abortion until 24 weeks of being pregnant beneath the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, and making any distinction on the premise of their marital standing is “constitutionally unsustainable”.

“The marital status of a woman can’t be ground to deprive her right to abort unwanted pregnancy,” the highest courtroom mentioned whereas saying its judgement.

“The decision to carry a pregnancy to full term or to abort it lies in the reproductive autonomy of a woman, which is rooted in bodily autonomy. Depriving her of this right will be an affront to a woman’s right to dignity,” the bench held in its ruling.

The bench had additionally mentioned that marital rape needs to be thought of as falling inside the that means of ‘rape’ for the aim of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act and guidelines and to be able to save girls from forceful being pregnant. “Any other interpretation (of rape) would have the effect of compelling a woman to give brith to and raise a child with a partner who inflicts mental and physical harm upon her,” it mentioned.

The judgement by the way coincided with secure abortion day which is marked on September 28 yearly, a truth Justice Chandrachud mentioned he didn’t find out about when knowledgeable, as reported by Livelaw.

On August 23, the Supreme Court had mentioned it could interpret the MTP Act and the foundations to get rid of the discrimination between married and single girls for permitting abortion until 24 weeks of being pregnant.

The bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud additionally included Justices AS Bopanna and JB Pardiwala.

Here are vital factors from the judgement:

The verdict: “The distinction between married and unmarried women under the abortion laws is “synthetic and constitutionally unsustainable” and perpetuates the stereotype that only married women are sexually active.”

“The rights of reproductive autonomy give similar rights to unmarried women as that to married women.”

1. On marital rape: 

Married girls, who conceived out of pressured intercourse by their husbands, will come inside the ambit of “survivors of sexual assault or rape or incest” talked about in Rule 3B(a) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules.

“Married women may also form the part of the class of survivors of sexual assault or rape. The ordinary meaning of the word rape is sexual intercourse with a person without consent or against their will. Regardless of whether such forced intercourse occurs in the context of matrimony, a woman may become pregnant as a result of non-consensual sexual intercourse performed upon her by her husband. Any pregnancy alleged to be caused by force by a pregnant woman is rape.”

Though the apex courtroom is but to adjudicate the marital rape concern, the feedback from the bench on marital rape for the aim of undesirable being pregnant could pave the best way for later judgment on the difficulty. 

2. More on marital rape:

“It is not inconceivable that married women become pregnant as a result of their husbands having “raped” them. The nature of sexual violence and the contours of consent do not undergo a transformation when one decides to marry. The institution of marriage does not influence the answer to the question of whether a woman has consented to sexual relations. If the woman is in an abusive relationship, she may face great difficulty in accessing medical resources or consulting doctors.”

ALSO READ | Marital rape: SC to listen to pleas on Delhi HC’s cut up verdict in February 2023

2. On intimate companion violence:

“We would be remiss in not recognising that intimate partner violence is the reality and can take the form of rape. The misconception that strangers are exclusively or almost exclusively responsible for sex and gender-based violence is a deeply regrettable one. Sex and gender-based violence in all its form in the context of the family have long formed a part of the lived experiences of women.”

3, On reproductive autonomy:

“The right to reproductive autonomy is closely linked with the right to bodily autonomy. As the term itself suggests, bodily autonomy is the right to take decisions about one’s body. The consequences of an unwanted pregnancy on a woman’s body as well as her mind cannot be understated. The foetus relies on the pregnant woman’s body for sustenance and nourishment until it is born.”

4. Legal recourse to show rape not needed:

“In order to avail the benefit of Rule 3B(a) of the MTP Act, the woman need not necessarily seek recourse to formal legal proceedings to prove the factum of sexual assault, rape or incest… Further, there is no requirement that an FIR must be registered or the allegation of rape must be proved in a court of law or some other forum before it can be considered true for the purposes of the MTP Act.”

5. Usage of the time period ‘girls’ applies not simply to cis-women:

Bar and Bench reported that the judgment makes use of the time period “all persons” (and never simply girls) constantly. 

The utilization of the time period ‘girls’ additionally contains these of different gender identities who’ve the reproductive system and desires of the feminine intercourse, for the aim of the MTP Act and the moment judgment, the bench was quoted as saying by Bar and Bench.

An excerpt from the judgement on the identical: “Before we embark upon a discussion on the law and its application, it must be mentioned that we use the term “woman” in this judgment as including persons other than cis-gender women who may require access to safe medical termination of their pregnancies.”

6. On secure intercourse schooling:

“The state must ensure that information regarding reproduction and safe sexual practices is disseminated to all parts of the population. Further, it must see to it that all segments of society are able to access contraceptives to avoid unintended pregnancies and plan their families. Medical facilities and RMPs (registered medical practitioners) must be present in each district and must be affordable to all.”

Background

On July 21, the highest courtroom had expanded the scope of the MTP Act to incorporate single girls and allowed a 25-year-old to abort her 24-week being pregnant arising out of a consensual relationship offered a medical board concluded that it’s going to not hurt her.

Earlier, the apex courtroom had questioned if a married girl is allowed to terminate as much as 24 weeks of being pregnant beneath the MTP Act and Rules framed beneath it, why to disclaim the identical to single girls, despite the fact that the danger is similar for each.

“A woman’s right to reproductive choice is an inseparable part of her personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution and she has a sacrosanct right to bodily integrity,” it had mentioned.
“Denying an unmarried woman the right to a safe abortion violates her personal autonomy and freedom. Live-in relationships have been recognised by this Court,” it had added.
The bench had additionally mentioned that the provisions of the abortion legislation now embrace the phrase “partner” as an alternative of “husband”. This reveals that Parliament didn’t need to confine a scenario of abortion to solely a matrimonial relationship, it mentioned.

The girl had approached the apex courtroom after the Delhi High Court declined to grant permission to abort her being pregnant which had arisen out of a consensual sexual relationship, saying that it nearly quantities to killing the foetus.

(With inputs from PTI)

In a landmark ruling on the reproductive rights of ladies, the Supreme Court held on Thursday that each one girls are entitled to secure and authorized abortion until 24 weeks of being pregnant beneath the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, and making any distinction on the premise of their marital standing is “constitutionally unsustainable”.

“The marital status of a woman can’t be ground to deprive her right to abort unwanted pregnancy,” the highest courtroom mentioned whereas saying its judgement.

“The decision to carry a pregnancy to full term or to abort it lies in the reproductive autonomy of a woman, which is rooted in bodily autonomy. Depriving her of this right will be an affront to a woman’s right to dignity,” the bench held in its ruling.

The bench had additionally mentioned that marital rape needs to be thought of as falling inside the that means of ‘rape’ for the aim of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act and guidelines and to be able to save girls from forceful being pregnant. “Any other interpretation (of rape) would have the effect of compelling a woman to give brith to and raise a child with a partner who inflicts mental and physical harm upon her,” it mentioned.

The judgement by the way coincided with secure abortion day which is marked on September 28 yearly, a truth Justice Chandrachud mentioned he didn’t find out about when knowledgeable, as reported by Livelaw.

On August 23, the Supreme Court had mentioned it could interpret the MTP Act and the foundations to get rid of the discrimination between married and single girls for permitting abortion until 24 weeks of being pregnant.

The bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud additionally included Justices AS Bopanna and JB Pardiwala.

Here are vital factors from the judgement:

The verdict: “The distinction between married and unmarried women under the abortion laws is “synthetic and constitutionally unsustainable” and perpetuates the stereotype that only married women are sexually active.”

“The rights of reproductive autonomy give similar rights to unmarried women as that to married women.”

1. On marital rape: 

Married girls, who conceived out of pressured intercourse by their husbands, will come inside the ambit of “survivors of sexual assault or rape or incest” talked about in Rule 3B(a) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules.

“Married women may also form the part of the class of survivors of sexual assault or rape. The ordinary meaning of the word rape is sexual intercourse with a person without consent or against their will. Regardless of whether such forced intercourse occurs in the context of matrimony, a woman may become pregnant as a result of non-consensual sexual intercourse performed upon her by her husband. Any pregnancy alleged to be caused by force by a pregnant woman is rape.”

Though the apex courtroom is but to adjudicate the marital rape concern, the feedback from the bench on marital rape for the aim of undesirable being pregnant could pave the best way for later judgment on the difficulty. 

2. More on marital rape:

“It is not inconceivable that married women become pregnant as a result of their husbands having “raped” them. The nature of sexual violence and the contours of consent do not undergo a transformation when one decides to marry. The institution of marriage does not influence the answer to the question of whether a woman has consented to sexual relations. If the woman is in an abusive relationship, she may face great difficulty in accessing medical resources or consulting doctors.”

ALSO READ | Marital rape: SC to listen to pleas on Delhi HC’s cut up verdict in February 2023

2. On intimate companion violence:

“We would be remiss in not recognising that intimate partner violence is the reality and can take the form of rape. The misconception that strangers are exclusively or almost exclusively responsible for sex and gender-based violence is a deeply regrettable one. Sex and gender-based violence in all its form in the context of the family have long formed a part of the lived experiences of women.”

3, On reproductive autonomy:

“The right to reproductive autonomy is closely linked with the right to bodily autonomy. As the term itself suggests, bodily autonomy is the right to take decisions about one’s body. The consequences of an unwanted pregnancy on a woman’s body as well as her mind cannot be understated. The foetus relies on the pregnant woman’s body for sustenance and nourishment until it is born.”

4. Legal recourse to show rape not needed:

“In order to avail the benefit of Rule 3B(a) of the MTP Act, the woman need not necessarily seek recourse to formal legal proceedings to prove the factum of sexual assault, rape or incest… Further, there is no requirement that an FIR must be registered or the allegation of rape must be proved in a court of law or some other forum before it can be considered true for the purposes of the MTP Act.”

5. Usage of the time period ‘girls’ applies not simply to cis-women:

Bar and Bench reported that the judgment makes use of the time period “all persons” (and never simply girls) constantly. 

The utilization of the time period ‘girls’ additionally contains these of different gender identities who’ve the reproductive system and desires of the feminine intercourse, for the aim of the MTP Act and the moment judgment, the bench was quoted as saying by Bar and Bench.

An excerpt from the judgement on the identical: “Before we embark upon a discussion on the law and its application, it must be mentioned that we use the term “woman” in this judgment as including persons other than cis-gender women who may require access to safe medical termination of their pregnancies.”

6. On secure intercourse schooling:

“The state must ensure that information regarding reproduction and safe sexual practices is disseminated to all parts of the population. Further, it must see to it that all segments of society are able to access contraceptives to avoid unintended pregnancies and plan their families. Medical facilities and RMPs (registered medical practitioners) must be present in each district and must be affordable to all.”

Background

On July 21, the highest courtroom had expanded the scope of the MTP Act to incorporate single girls and allowed a 25-year-old to abort her 24-week being pregnant arising out of a consensual relationship offered a medical board concluded that it’s going to not hurt her.

Earlier, the apex courtroom had questioned if a married girl is allowed to terminate as much as 24 weeks of being pregnant beneath the MTP Act and Rules framed beneath it, why to disclaim the identical to single girls, despite the fact that the danger is similar for each.

“A woman’s right to reproductive choice is an inseparable part of her personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution and she has a sacrosanct right to bodily integrity,” it had mentioned.
“Denying an unmarried woman the right to a safe abortion violates her personal autonomy and freedom. Live-in relationships have been recognised by this Court,” it had added.
The bench had additionally mentioned that the provisions of the abortion legislation now embrace the phrase “partner” as an alternative of “husband”. This reveals that Parliament didn’t need to confine a scenario of abortion to solely a matrimonial relationship, it mentioned.
The girl had approached the apex courtroom after the Delhi High Court declined to grant permission to abort her being pregnant which had arisen out of a consensual sexual relationship, saying that it nearly quantities to killing the foetus.

(With inputs from PTI)