In a landmark ruling, the court permits the continuation of Assisted Reproductive Technology procedures, emphasizing constitutional rights over statutory age limits.
In a significant judgment delivered by the Delhi High Court, the petition filed by Shewta Tuteja and others against the Union of India has resulted in a progressive decision that safeguards reproductive rights. The court allowed the petitioners to undergo a frozen embryo transfer (FET) procedure for their remaining five cryopreserved embryos at Cloudnine Hospital, Dwarka. This ruling underscores the importance of reproductive autonomy and decisional privacy as fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The case revolved around the interpretation of age restrictions under Section 21(g) of the Assisted Reproductive Technology Regulation Act, 2021 (ART Act). The petitioners, a couple who initiated the ART process within the prescribed age limit, faced denial for further embryo transfer due to crossing the age threshold. However, the court found that denying permission based solely on this marginal crossing would undermine constitutional principles of reproductive autonomy and privacy.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, presiding over the case, emphasized the need for a purposive interpretation of the ART Act, which should align with constitutional values while also preserving the regulatory purpose of ensuring ethical and safe ART practices. The court recognized that the petitioners were not initiating a new ART cycle but sought to continue an already commenced process involving embryos created within the statutory age limits.
Drawing from precedents such as the Supreme Court's recognition of reproductive choice in Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Administration and the landmark privacy judgment in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, the court highlighted that reproductive rights and decisional autonomy are integral to personal liberty under Article 21. The judgment also referenced similar decisions from other High Courts that support the continuation of ART processes under comparable circumstances.
The court concluded that the statutory framework should not create insurmountable barriers to ongoing reproductive processes involving cryopreserved embryos. It allowed the petitioners to proceed with the FET procedure, provided all necessary medical safeguards are in place. This decision is seen as a victory for reproductive rights, setting a precedent for balancing statutory regulations with constitutional freedoms.
Bottom Line:
Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) - Utilization of cryopreserved embryos after crossing statutory age limit under ART Act permissible if the ART process was initiated within the prescribed age limit.
Statutory provision(s): Assisted Reproductive Technology Regulation Act, 2021, Section 21(g), Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Shewta Tuteja v. Union of India, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2912425
