The Bombay High Court expressed dissatisfaction on Friday with the medical board at JJ Hospital in Mumbai for requiring a pregnant woman, in her 27th week, to travel from Kalyan without performing an initial check-up.
Justices Sarang Kotwal and Dr. Neela Gokhale, who formed the bench, chose not to take disciplinary action against the doctors after they issued an unconditional apology. However, the judges stressed, “We expect the medical board to act with more sensitivity and responsibility in future cases.”
The court was reviewing a petition from a woman who discovered during a routine examination that her fetus had abnormalities. The medical board at JJ Hospital, established under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, had examined her and submitted a report on October 1, 2024, indicating the anomalies and the associated risks of mortality and morbidity.
Based on this report, the medical board recommended the termination of the pregnancy. However, when the woman visited King Edward Memorial (KEM) Hospital for the procedure, she was informed that a court order was necessary for any termination past 24 weeks.
As a result, she approached the court for assistance. On October 7, the court ordered JJ Hospital to convene a medical board to assess her health, as required by law. Advocate Manisha Jagtap, representing the woman, noted that she traveled over 50 kilometers to JJ Hospital and arrived on October 9 for her check-up.
Determined to receive care, she remained in the hospital corridor overnight, but no examination occurred on October 10. During a hearing that day, the medical board presented the same report from October 1, raising concerns among the judges. They remarked that the board’s actions had caused significant hardship for the woman, who was in her 27th week of pregnancy.
“We express our extreme displeasure at the conduct of the medical board and the insensitivity displayed in handling this situation,” the bench stated.
The judges pointed out that the medical board justified its inaction by claiming there would be little change in the fetus’s condition in just a week and a half. They noted that this inaction directly contradicted the court’s order. The bench criticized the board for failing to consider the woman’s current health condition and not assessing whether she was fit for the termination procedure.
The court ordered a new medical examination of the woman, instructing the board to provide a report on both the fetal anomalies and her health status to inform its decision on the possible termination of her pregnancy.
“Given the medical board’s previous conduct, the petitioner should receive specific importance and priority,” the court added.
Following the court’s directive, the medical board examined the woman on Friday and submitted its updated report, which indicated that she was fit to undergo the procedure. On October 11, the bench granted permission for the woman to proceed with the medical termination of her pregnancy.
You Might Be Interested In
