New Delhi: The Supreme Court Monday criticised the Gujarat High Court for passing an order against a superior court's ruling and termed it against constitutional philosophy, while hearing a plea of a rape survivor seeking court’s permission for abortion.
A bench comprising justices B V Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan said the court does not appreciate the high court’s counterblast to its orders. The bench said, “what is happening in the High Court of Gujarat? Do judges reply like this to the superior court's order?” The court made this observation while asking the High Court the need to pass the suo moto order on August 19.
The HC had declined the relief to the rape survivour but the apex court allowed the termination of her pregnancy.
The top court said there is no need for any judge of any court to justify their order and also criticised the Gujarat HC order for imposing an unjust condition on a rape survivor, forcing her to bear the child and stressed that, it "is against constitutional philosophy".
SG says to fix clerical Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Gujarat government, urged the court to refrain from making comments on the High Court judge and said some misunderstanding was there.
The top court said how could it ignore the High Court’s counterblast and said, “no judge can counterblast Supreme Court's order", and again asked what was the need to pass such an order.
-
'Can't pass order against Supreme Court...', Supreme Court criticises Gujarat HC on plea of rape survivor seek termination of pregnancy https://t.co/WqVKUT6Jhs
— ETV Bharat (@ETVBharatEng) August 21, 2023 " class="align-text-top noRightClick twitterSection" data="
">'Can't pass order against Supreme Court...', Supreme Court criticises Gujarat HC on plea of rape survivor seek termination of pregnancy https://t.co/WqVKUT6Jhs
— ETV Bharat (@ETVBharatEng) August 21, 2023'Can't pass order against Supreme Court...', Supreme Court criticises Gujarat HC on plea of rape survivor seek termination of pregnancy https://t.co/WqVKUT6Jhs
— ETV Bharat (@ETVBharatEng) August 21, 2023
Mehta requested the bench to not make any adverse comments against the said judge of the High court and “comments can be discouraging". Justice Nagarathna clarified that the comment was not against any particular judge but on the manner in which the matter was dealt with.
Mehta said the Saturday’s order of the High Court was passed only to fix a "clerical error" and "there was a clerical error in the previous order and that was fixed on Saturday...”.
The HC order came after the apex court criticised the delay by the High Court in deciding the rape survivor's petition, saying "valuable time" has been lost.
On August 19, the Supreme Court castigated the Gujarat High Court for adjourning a case of termination of pregnancy for close to two weeks, saying “there has to be some sense of urgency in such matters. There can't be such a lackadaisical approach…”.
The top court directed that a fresh medical report should be submitted by the medical board after examining the petitioner once again. The bench said the latest report should be submitted to the court by tomorrow evening.
"We direct the petitioner to appear before KMCRI to be examined once again and the latest status report may be submitted to this court by tomorrow evening by 6 PM. Same shall be put up before this court on Monday. The matter shall be taken as the first item on board”, said the top court.
The petitioner has alleged rape. According to a counsel familiar with the case, the petitioner was in a relationship with a man and later she found out that he was already married. Therefore, she is alleging that her consent was vitiated.
The petitioner's counsel contended that his client would soon be approaching the 26th week of her pregnancy. The Supreme Court allowed rape survivor’s plea seeking termination of pregnancy.
The top court said subsequent to the medical procedure to be carried out, in the event the foetus is found to be alive, the hospital is to give all facilities including incubation to ensure the foetus survives. The bench said that the state government will take steps to ensure the child is adopted in accordance with law.
