Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The convict, his wife, and sister-in-law had attempted to convince and pressurise the victim and her mother to not lodge a complaint and get an abortion.
Justice B. V Nagarathna who is currently serving as a Judge of Supreme Court of India, formerly served as a Judge of Karnataka High Court until her elevation to the Supreme Court. Justice Nagarathna is also the potential contender for the first ever woman Chief Justice of India.
Celebrating the 78th Independence Day by revisiting the most historical legal achievements of the country
A woman’s decision in whether or not to go ahead with the termination of her pregnancy is a decision that is to be taken by no one but herself. This is primarily based on the widely acknowledged idea of bodily autonomy. Here, her consent reigns supreme.”
“Considering the fact that the minor girl is aged about 15 years, and she is mentally challenged, coming from a very low strata of the society and considering her family background as well, in all probability the girl would face a lot of problems in raising the child.”
The Court stated that the petitioner was an adult and was entitled to her sovereign decisions for reproductive autonomy, and the views of her parents or of her partner were not relevant.
Several pro-life medical associations and doctors challenged the FDA regulations issued in 2016 and 2021 that ensured easy access of mifepristone for termination of pregnancy and sought a preliminary injunction for the FDA to rescind these regulatory actions.
“Pregnant persons seeking termination of pregnancy seek predictability for their future. The uncertainty caused by changing opinions of the medical board must therefore balance the distress it would cause to the pregnant person by providing cogent and sound reasons.”
Earlier, the Supreme Court has directed the Dean at Sion Hospital to immediately constitute a team for undertaking the medical termination of pregnancy of the minor.
Supreme Court: In a criminal appeal filed against the order passed by the Karnataka High Court, wherein the Court allowed the petition
The aim to enshrine the right to abortion in the French Constitution which gained impetus after SCOTUS overruled Roe v. Wade in 2022 was finally fulfilled with 780 MPs favouring the inclusion.
The Court also peremptorily directed the parents to ensure that the minor brother against whom allegations were made for impregnating his minor sister was not allowed anywhere near her or to have access to her in any manner.
Considering the fact that various social and medical complications are likely to arise since the child will be born from the girl's own sibling, Kerala High Court found the permission sought for termination of pregnancy to be inevitable.
The Delhi High Court observed that it was aware of the conflict that plagued women who were torn between societal and familial pressure to bear sons and the emotional stress and moral uncertainty they experienced for not bearing a male child.
This roundup revisits the analyses of Supreme Court’s judgments/orders on validity of AIBE; ex-communication of Dawoodi Bohras; decriminalisation of adultery; permissibility of DNA test of children to prove allegations of adultery; and more. It also covers reports on the career trajectory & important decisions of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Dutta and the newly appointed 7 judges of the Supreme Court; Explainers on important law points; and Cases Reported in SCC Weekly in the month of February.
While deliberating over the case filed by non-profit abortion funds operating in Texas, the US District Court held that Texas’ Attorney General cannot enforce Texan anti-abortion laws outside the State of Texas
by Sanjay Vashishtha†
Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 10
The woman lost her father during the Covid-19 pandemic and her mother is unwell. She also has a married sister, 10 years older to her. However, all of them showed their inability to raise the child.
A curious case presented itself before the Karnataka HC wherein they deliberated over an agreement for adoption entered between the biological parents and adoptive parents, when the child was still unborn.
The court has reversed the US District Court order that had barred the enforcement of a law passed by Southern District of Indiana, requiring the medical providers to dispose of foetal remains via burial or cremation instead of as “medical waste” stating that the law violated the First Amendment.