Bombay High Court: The Division Bench comprising of GS Kulkarni & Firdosh P Pooniwalla, JJ. disposed of a writ petition in the favour of the petitioner, filed by a mother under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to protect the rights and health of her seven-months pregnant minor daughter. The Court ordered that medical institutions could not insist on a police complaint as a condition to provide medical treatment to the daughter, when the petitioner’s daughter did not intend to pursue legal action against her partner and did not see herself as a victim under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (“POCSO Act”) but had gotten pregnant out of a consensual relationship with another minor.
Background
The mother of the pregnant minor girl filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to protect the rights and health interests of her seven-months pregnant minor daughter-out of a consensual relationship with another minor.
The writ petition was instituted due to the petitioner’s grievance that her daughter’s fundamental rights enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution, that guarantees the provision of medical treatment that cannot be denied in any case, was being violated due to medical institutions denying her treatment without a police complaint.
Since the relationship between the daughter and her partner, despite being minors, was consensual, therefore, neither the petitioner nor her daughter intended to take any legal action against the daughter’s partner. In the lack of an intention to pursue a complaint against the person, there existed no police complaint to show to the medical institutions to have the daughter attended there.
Analysis and Order
Concerning the medical treatment to be provided to the petitioner’s daughter, in the lack of an intention to file a police complaint, the Court opined that there was no harm in the petitioner making an Emergency Police Report (“EPR”), that can be submitted with the Government Pleader in a sealed manner, ensuring the privacy and keeping the daughter’s identity disclosed. The same could be appropriately utilised with the prior permission of the Court, should the need ever arise.
Regarding the provision of treatment by the medical institutions, the Court opined that there cannot be an insistence from any hospital or medical centre towards the petitioner to register a police complaint as a condition to receive medical treatment for her daughter, thereby depriving her of the same until this condition is met.
The Court further opined that the grant of medical aid to any person is directly concomitant with the guarantees of Article 21 of the Constitution.
Post stating its analysis, observations and opinions, the Court ordered as follows to:
-
The petitioner to provide an EPR, to be submitted to the Government Pleader, and the latter shall verify the same and keep it in a sealed cover, only be used in necessity through obtaining Court’s prior approval.
-
The Dean of Sir JJ Group of Hospitals to take all necessary precautions and care in maintaining the confidentiality of the daughter and to provide her medical treatment without the insistence of any police complaint.
The Court further provided that the petitioner’s daughter shall be entitled to seek medical treatment at the Sir JJ Group of Hospitals during her pregnancy and be provided with all pre and post maternity care.
Further, the Court ordered the St. Catherine’ Home to admit the daughter and render all care and cooperation to her until childbirth.
The Court lastly ordered that the issues of adoption of the child to be expressly kept open and dismissed the petition hereof.
[XYZ v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 1026, Order dated: 10-04-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Advocates for the Petitioner: Advocate Nigel Quraishy, Advocate Dhananjay Deshmukh
Advocates for the Respondents: Government Pleader P. H. Kantharia, ,Additional Government Pleader Pooja Patil
Buy Constitution of India HERE
Buy Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 HERE
