New Delhi: The Supreme Court has come down heavily on the Gujarat high court for its handling of a 25-year-old rape survivor’s plea for an abortion.
On Monday (August 21), a bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan allowed the woman to go ahead with the pregnancy termination, as she was deemed medically fit for the procedure. The Supreme Court was hearing the woman’s appeal on the matter after a single-judge bench of the high court had rejected her petition on August 17, Bar and Bench reported
However, the Supreme Court was informed on Monday that the high court too had heard the matter on Saturday, and passed an order after the Supreme Court’s order for a medical examination the same day. The high court order had rejected the abortion plea.
“Are you supporting this? We do not appreciate the high court passing an order as a counterblast to our order. Thank you for bringing it to our notice, but are you supporting? What is happening in Gujarat high court?” Justice Nagarathna asked the state’s lawyer.
“In a disposed of matter, it (high court) passed again? How?” Justice Bhuyan added.
“No court in India can pass an order like this on a Saturday against a superior court order. Without giving notice to the other side,” Justice Nagarathna said.
“There was no need for the high court to justify,” she continued.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Gujarat government, claimed that there was a “clerical error” that led to the high court’s second order on the matter. “My lords may leave it at that. There was a misunderstanding,” he added.
However, according to the Bar and Bench, the Supreme Court was unconvinced by this response.
According to LiveLaw, the Supreme Court had been unhappy with the high court’s overall approach in the case, calling it “lackadaisical”. The court had first adjourned the matter by 12 days despite its urgency, and then advanced the hearing to August 17 when it summarily dismissed the petition. The Supreme Court had asked the high court registry to answer for this, saying the woman had lost “valuable time”.