Right to abortion is a very controversial topic. The two contradicting opinions on the subject are very genuine on their own. At own hand the right of the mother whereas on the other hand the right of the unborn child along with the debates on libertarianism and utilitarianism. The researcher has undertaken the study of reproductive rights of women mainly focusing on the issue of abortion and the laws relating to abortion in India and America. The researcher talks about the issue revolving around abortion and how has the abortion laws came into being in India and America. The researcher is trying to make a comparative study of the condition of women in a developed country like USA and an underdeveloped country like India by studying the abortion laws in these countries. With the help of a number of case laws and study on how the statutes have evolved in these countries the researcher presents a conclusion on the reproductive rights of women.
Keywords: abortion, constitutional provisions, women, America, India
Rights and freedom of women are always a debateable topic for the community at large. Every aspect of a woman’s life is scrutinized, marked and checked by everyone else but her. Starting from what she should wear to what she should say to how she should be or not be to whether or not she should go out, is all controlled by others. Recently, all these issues have become a topic for debate and with the assignment at hand we will talk about the reproductive rights of women with a special emphasis on the right to abortion, a comparative study of laws in India and USA.
Abortion rights hang between the mother’s abortion rights and rights of the unborn. The other debate that goes around abortion is the right of an individual versus interests of the community. The latter is governed by the ideologies of Libertarianism and Utilitarianism. Where libertarianism talks about rights of an individual to be given preference over the state as far as it does not infringe the right of the other and utilitarianism says that state action will be upheld as it serves for greater number of people and uploads the interest of the community at large. Medical termination of pregnancy or abortion has to be understood from the viewpoint of the women who decides to undergo the procedure. “There are various reasons as to why women seek abortion. The reasons appear to range from such proximate causes as the desire to limit family size or to space pregnancies, the preference for sons and medical compulsion, to more distant determinants like poverty, violence and local belief systems”1. There is a stigma attached to unmarried women and pregnancy and that becomes the major reason abortion to take place. Number of unmarried women undergoing abortion is more than the number of married women. World Health Organization says that restricting access to abortion does not reduce the number of abortions. “Women with unintended pregnancies rely on abortion even in settings where abortion is restricted. Generally speaking, abortion rates are similar in countries where abortion is broadly legal and in those where it is restricted (40 per 1000 women and 36 per 1000 women, respectively).”2 Restriction on abortion does not reduce the number of abortion but definitely increase the number of unsafe abortions which ends in death of the woman.
“It was the US Supreme Court’s assertion in 1965 that privacy was a fundamental right under the US Constitution that led to its landmark judgement eight years later upholding abortion rights in the famous Roe v. Wade case.”3 Now five decades later when India in its landmark Judgement of K. S. Puttuswamy v. Union of India4 has established that Right to privacy as a fundamental right and the judgment in its paragraph 171 upholds the reproductive rights to be part of the right to privacy we can hope for some amendments in the Medical Termination of Pregnancy act along with Section 312 of the Indian Penal Code. The first part of this paper talks about the provisions given under the Constitutions of both India and America backing the right to abortion of women in both the countries. Right to privacy of women is the ground on which the abortion rights of a woman stands in both the countries. A comparison of the constitutional provisions of both the countries is taken up in this part of the paper.
The second part focuses on the legislations related to abortion in USA and the landmark judgement of Roe v. Wade. This part discusses the history of issue of abortion vis-à-vis different case laws that have paved the way for abortion rights of women in USA. The third part of the paper talks about Indian legislation on abortion and the history of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act in India along with the upcoming amendments of the act. This section of the paper will also talk about the Pre- Conception Pre- Natal Diagonstic Techniques Act and POCSO Act in relation to abortion and how these two acts contribute in the debates involving abortion rights of women.
In part four of the paper the researcher will go on to analyse the comparison of the laws on abortion in India and USA. At last the researcher will end in conclusion and acknowledge thesources in references with the help of which completing this paper became possible.
Reproductive Rights of women and abortion rights is a global issue. Be it developed, underdeveloped or least developed countries of the world, the rights and freedom of women comes very down on the priority list. A number of international organizations are striving hard for improving the conditions of women in all the countries around the globe.
Sustainable Development Goal No. 3 talks about ensuring healthy lives and promote for all at all ages. Issues that can be related to abortion under SDG 3 are to reduce the global maternal mortality rate to less than 70 per 100 000 live births by 2030. Target to reduce one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being. By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services, including for family planning, information and education, and the integration of reproductive health into national strategies and programmes. Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential healthcare services and access to safe, effective, quality and affordable essential medicines and vaccines for all. Organizations like World Health Organization are also working towards spreading awareness about abortion and it believes that restricting abortion will not reduce the number of abortions rather it has increased the rate of maternal mortality. WHO believes that countries need to focus more on providing safe and accessible abortion to the woman. A number of conventions and treaties also talk about abortion and makes it mandatory for the signatory state members to ratify them in their own municipal laws according to the provisions of these conventions/treaties, a list of a few is given below.
• CONVENTION ON ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION
AGAINST WOMEN- Articles 1-3, 5 (a), 10 (h), 12 and 16 (e) talks about outlining women’s rights to equality in law and practice, to health including access to family planning information and services, and to determine the number and spacing of children; and defying states’ duty to eliminate cultural prejudices based on stereotyped roles for men and women
• INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL
RIGHT- Articles 2(2), 3, 12(1) talks about guaranteeing the rights to health, equality, and non-discrimination.
• INTERNATIONAL COVENANCT ON CIVIL AND POILITICAL RIGHTS
Articles 2(1), 6, 7, 17 talks about protecting the rights to life, non-discrimination and equality, freedom from torture and ill-treatment, and privacy.
• CONVENTION ON RIGHTS OF THE CHILD-
Articles 2(2), 3, 5-6, 12, 16, 24- protecting the rights to life, health, non-discrimination, development, privacy, and to express their views and having them given due weight; and outlining that all rights are to be interpreted through the lens of the best interest of the child, with respect for their evolving capacities.
• CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITY (CRPD)-
Articles 3, 5-7, 8(1)(b), 10, 12, 17, 22, 23(1)(b), 25 – calling for respect for the inherent dignity, individual autonomy including freedom to make one’s own choices and guaranteeing rights to life, privacy, personal integrity, non-discrimination, legal capacity on an equal basis with others and support in exercising this capacity; outlining state duties to “combat stereotypes, prejudices and harmful practices relating to persons with disability, including those based on sex and age;” and safeguarding the rights to sexual and reproductive health founded on a basis of free and informed consent, including the rights to decide on the number and spacing of children, to access ageappropriate reproductive and family planning information, and to access the necessary means to exercise these rights.
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS OF INDIA AND AMERICA
The debate of two philosophies of libertarianism and utilitarianism can be put to rest if we analyse the reproductive rights from point of view that who gets affected the most. Reproduction and abortion are some of those issues which affect the individual and not the community. With the characteristics of the issue at hand it can be said that the philosophy of libertarianism will be applied here. Right to privacy also states that the right to reproduction and abortion is right of a woman and are private issues that concern her and hence this debate can be put to rest.
Right to Privacy gained the constitutional status in the USA after the landmark judgement of Griswold v. Connecticut 5 in which the court in a 7:2 decision held that right to privacy can be read into “Due Process Clause” of 14th Amendment.6 The decision in this case led to the landmark judgment of Roe v. Wade which made abortion legal on the basis that abortion rights are part of right to privacy.
Article 21 of Indian Constitution is the counterpart of Due Process Clause of US Constitution7. Article 21 talks about “personal liberty” and not “liberty”, the intent of which was to limit liberties to personal liberties. The Supreme Court over the years has given different interpretations of the term. From not including right to privacy under article 21 in Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh8 to widening the scope of “personal liberty” to include the freedoms entailed in Article 19 in the case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India.9 A number of cases came after Kharak Singh, like Gobind v. State of M. P. in which right to privacy was upheld stating that right to privacy as part of the “penumbral zone” of the fundamental rights10.
Then in the case of R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu the court enumerated certain exceptions of right to privacy. All these cases came but could not overrule the judgement of Kharak Singh as the decision in this case was of six-judge bench.The judgement of Kharak Singh was overrules very recently in the case of K. S. Puttuswamy v. Union of India11 the court in this case gave Right to Privacy the status of fundamental right under Part III of the Constitution of India. “They also over-ruled the ADM Jabalpur case – a decision that allowed for fundamental rights to be suspended during a State declared emergency. This decision has connected our privacy jurisprudence over the years with our international commitments and established our conformity with comparative laws around the world.”12 The case also talked about the reproductive rights of women and said them to be private and will come under Right to Privacy of women.
Reproductive rights of women and abortion rights are both concerned with the right to privacy and in both India and USA, the philosophy of libertarianism has been considered for understanding these rights of women.
USA LAWS ON ABORTION AND ROE V. WADE
The history of abortions in USA dates to 1821 when for the first time State of Connecticut passed a law criminalizing abortion, before which abortion was legal in America. Since then abortion has seen several swings taking it on both sides of law. In mid-19th century American Medical Association brought the perspective of woman’s health for supporting the argument of abortion with exception13. But by the end of the century all the states brought legislation banning abortion. Again, a wave of shift was experienced and in late 1950s people again started to question whether abortion should be banned in all circumstances14. The deciding factor on the subject of abortion in USA is the judgement of Roe v. Wade15. The judgement is a landmark one and still holds the same importance even after so many years. The case talks about right of privacy of women and includes right to abortion under it. The opinion of majority in Roe v. Wade is that right to privacy whether under the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty or under the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of right to people is broad enough to include the right to abortion of women.16 Roe v. Wade did not answer the question of when does a life begin.17 It did not make abortion an absolute right but acknowledged the state’s inclination in protecting a life and the Court set up a trimester framework for state regulation. “In the first trimester, the decision to end a pregnancy is left to the woman and her doctor. In the second trimester, the state may regulate the abortion to protect the health of the mother. At and after the point of viability- when the foetus is able to survive independently outside a mother’s womb- a state may ban abortion, except when the health of the mother is under question.”18.
Roe v. Wade was made possible when in the previous year the Supreme Court struck down thelast law against the contraception in the case of Eisentadt v. Baird19. The court in this case observed that the right to privacy also includes the right of women to decide when to bear a child and when to beget it. The idea behind this decision is that it’s the woman’s life which is affected the most by the pregnancy, starting from her personal life to her professional life. Also the decision was based on providing a happy life to the child whose life will be under question if the woman bearing the child is not happy with its existence.
Out of the 52 states of USA, different states have different standing with the issue of abortion. The courts have never shown their dissent towards Roe v. Wade but a number of limitations have been imposed to curb the full implementation of the decision. In the case of Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey20, the onus of state to prove “compelling interest” has been removed and it is now on the woman to prove that state’s restriction places an “undue burden” on her right to choose.21 With the coming of this judgement the states have put a number of restriction on the process of abortion, like mandatory waiting periods (12 states), parental consent for minors (30 states) and mandatory lectures on foetal development etc.22
ABORTION LAWS OF WOMEN IN INDIA
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860
Abortion is a criminal offence under Section 312 to Section 316 of the Indian Penal Code. The Code does not use the word ‘abortion’ rather it uses the words like ‘miscarriage’, ‘induced miscarriage’ and ‘unlawful termination of pregnancy’ is used to refer abortion. Technically all these words are synonymous to abortion23. The Code criminalises voluntary miscarriage under Section 312. Under the code there are two conditions in which this is an offence, one being when the mother is with the child and the second being when the mother starts to feel the movement of the child (the process ids also called ‘quickening’).
With the enactment of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1971, it is mandatory that the provisions under IPC are to be read with the provisions governing abortion under the MTP Act of 1971.
MEDICAL TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY ACT, 1971
In 1971, India enacted a law named as Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act. It lays down exceptions for law stated in the Indian Penal Code and specifies in what circumstances abortion should be allowed. The act allows for medical termination of pregnancy on recommendation of one practitioner if the pregnancy is 12 weeks and two medical practitioners if the pregnancy is between 12 to 20 weeks. The above-mentioned rule is only to be applied if there is a danger to the life of the mother or the unborn child.24
The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act is extending exceptions to the provision of Indian Penal Code. The act is based on the utilitarian approach to curb the increasing population and does not give the absolute right of abortion to the women.25 The act states that abortion can be done only if the medical practitioner is satisfied that it is the necessity of the hour and not at the will of the mother. This invalidates the entire debate of the reproductive right of women and the abortion rights which are included under the right to privacy of woman; also the act only gives the right to the married woman and the woman who have faced sexual assault or rape.
The Supreme Court in the case of Jacob George v. State of Kerala26, states that provisions of IPC related to abortion is to be read with the provisions of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1971.27 The question of constitutionality of the MTP Act on the ground that it violates the fundamental right of the unborn child, was raised in Rajasthan High Court, the court rejected the plea by stating that the act is in consonance with the Article 21 of the Constitution of India as the main objective of the act is to protect the life of the pregnant woman.28
In the case of Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Administration29, the Supreme Court upheld the reproductive right of a retarded woman and her consent in making decision about her abortion. The court gave the reason that if the retarded woman can consent for sexual intercourse she can consent for abortion as well. The Bombay High Court in High Court on its own Motion v. State of Maharshtra 30 reiterated what was held in Suchita Srivastava and upheld the right a woman in deciding whether or not she wants to continue with the pregnancy. The Court gave the reason by stating that human right of a person starts after the birth and an unborn foetus is not an entity of human rights.
Following are the judgements given by High Courts of different states and Supreme Court on varying issues related to abortion:
• PERMISSION OF JUDICIAL AUTHORITY FOR ABORTION
X v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi31
– an HIV+ 18-year-old girl was initially denied abortion then the Delhi HC referred S. 3 of MTP and gave permission.32
In Hallo Bi v. State of Madhya Pradesh33, a woman under-trial prisoner who was 12-week pregnant was not allowed abortion by the Chief Magistrate. She then went to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh; the court allowed her abortion on the standing the forced prosecution is a form of rape and is covered under Section 3(2) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1971.
• ABORTION POST 20 WEEKS OF PREGNANCY
Meera Santosh Pal v. Union of India34, the Supreme Court allowed because there was risk to the woman’s life by emphasising a woman’s right to reproductive autonomy and bodily integrity. In High Court on its Own Motion v. State of Maharashtra35, the Bombay High Court said that continuing any unwanted pregnancy to term “represents a violation of the woman’s bodily integrity and aggravates her mental trauma which would be deleterious to her mental health.”
Kavita v. State of Haryana36, the court disallowed termination of pregnancy because accordingto the medical practitioner the life of the minor rape survivor was at risk.
• FOETAL IMPAIRMENT
Mamta Verma v. Union of India37, the court in this case allowed for abortion post 20 weeks ofpregnancy because in the opinion of the medical practitioner there were a number of foetalimpairment and it would be difficult for the foetus to survive outside the womb and also posedanger to the life of the woman.
Shaikh Ayesha Khatoon v. Union of India38, “the Bombay High Court allowed termination ofa 27 weeks’ pregnancy, where there were several foetal impairments and low chances ofindependent survival post-birth. The Court also held that in order to meet the object of the MTPAct and advance the cause of justice, the conditions for medical termination of pregnancyprovided under Section 3(2)(b)(i) & (ii) of the MTP Act should be read into Section 5(1), whichconsiders termination of pregnancies over 20 weeks. It thus ruled that in cases of foetalimpairments, mental injury caused to the woman would be sufficient to meet the requirementof Section 5 and denial of her choice to terminate the pregnancy would violate her personalliberty under Article 21.”39
• PREGNANCY RESULTED FROM RAPE
Ashaben v. State of Gujarat40
– the Gujarat High Court adopted a strict interpretation of Section 5 of the MTP Act stating that it allowed termination of pregnancies exceeding 20 weeks only if continuation of pregnancy would endanger the life of the pregnant woman and not on the ground that the pregnancy resulted from rape.
• RAPE OF A MINOR
Bhavikaben v. State of Gujarat41
– the Gujarat High Court allowed medical termination of pregnancy taking into account the young age and health of the rape survivor, the grave mental injury caused due to the unwanted pregnancy, and the medical opinion indicating no risk to her life from termination of pregnancy.
• SPOUSAL CONSENT
Dr. Mangla Dogra v. Anil Kumar Malhotra42
– the court rejected the case filed by husband and said that the MTP Act does not require the husband’s consent for an abortion. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1971 does not allow for abortion rather it gives situations in which abortion can be allowed under sections 3 and 5.
This has been challenged in the case of Swati Agarwal & Ors. v. Union of India43. A PIL was filed by Swati Agarwal; Garima Sekseria; Prachi Vats, claiming Sections 3 and 5 of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1971 to be in violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. “The prayers of this petition sought to widen women’s access to safe abortions and grant them greater reproductive choices. It also asserted that the State has a positive obligation under Article 21 to guarantee the right to health. Therefore, the petitioners requested the establishment of safe abortion clinics to reduce maternal mortality.”44 The Supreme Court has taken the plea into consideration and has asked Central Government’s opinion on the same. The court has observed that Section 3 (2) and 3 (3) puts undue burden on the women to exercise free reproductive choices and their right to privacy keeping in mind the K .S. Puttuswamy Judgement.45
MEDICAL TERMINATION BILL, 2020
The bill has been proposed in the parliament and seeks to bring about certain changes in the previous law. Starting with, one medical practitioner’s opinion will be required for pregnancy up to 20 weeks and 2 medical practitioner’s opinion will be required for pregnancy between 20 to 24 weeks. The amendment bill also takes into account the unmarried couples and overall extension of time period for abortion to 24 weeks. The major drawback which can be seen at this stage is the fact that it does not take into consideration the points raised in Swati Agarwal and Ors. v. Union of India.
THE PRE-CONCEPTION AND PRE-NATAL DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES ACT, 1994
The technique of detection of gender of the child is rendered illegal and is punishable under this act. The main objective of enactment of this legislation was to control the increasing number of female foeticides. This act puts in a different perspective to the whole debate of whose life matters over whom. This act protects the life of the unborn child without giving any consideration to the reproductive rights of women.
PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012
The POCSO Act 2012 is enacted to prevent and address the issues related to child sexual abuse. The Act does not address women’s access to safe abortion services and requires mandatory reporting on behalf of the medical providers for minors seeking sexual health related services including safe abortion. While the MTP Act provides for abortion on grounds of rape while ensuring confidentiality and there have been cases under the MTP Act which have allowed minor girls to get abortion done considering the young age of the minor46. The overlapping nature of the two acts and the confusion created by the two has been reason for delay and sometimes denial of abortion services to the girl victims under POCSO Act.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF RIGHT TO ABORTION IN INDIA AND USA
The USA has seen more number of debates and movements on the issue of abortion as compared to India. Indian Judiciary has taken the help of judgements of USA on the subject of abortion. This makes the comparison between the two a valid one. Both the countries face similar issues revolving around abortion. Both in India and USA, the abortion right is not an absolute one. In USA, the absolute right to abortion was given under Roe v. Wade but with time the government and judiciary has imposed a number of restriction on women and their right to abortion whereas in India the provision laid down in MTP act is negative in nature and does not make abortion legal, rather it lays down situations in which it can be allowed depending on certain criteria. The laws that are followed in both the countries are of utilitarian in nature and not libertarian.
Both the countries have placed the right to abortion under the ambit of right to privacy. Indian Judiciary has referred Roe v. Wade in deciding a number of cases on abortion in India. The only difference that can be seen is the time that will be taken by India to reach that place where USA reached with the coming of Roe v. Wade. The problem that USA face is that even after giving the landmark judgement on the subject five decades ago, still the question of absolute right for women is not answered or one can say that they are going backwards by placing restrictions on the right after making it absolute in 1973.
The condition of women is same whether we talk about a developed country like USA or in an underdeveloped country like India. Women face same kind of issues and oppression. With the advent of movement of feminism, a number of women related issues have surfaced and a lot of debate is going around them. Women have been fighting for decades now but their empowerment is at a very slow rate.
Out of the many issues abortion is one of the most controversial issue. The two debates around abortion make it even more controversial. First, who’s right to life matters over whom and second, libertarianism versus utilitarianism. In the debate of Right of Unborn Child v. Right of Woman, we cannot deny that there is another life involved but the bigger question that is to be answered is what life that unborn child will have in the situation where his mother had to bear her unwillingly. A wave of change can also be seen in countries which have stricter laws relating to termination of pregnancy. In 2020, Senate of Argentina passed a legislation making abortion legal till 14 weeks of pregnancy which is a huge step for a nation where abortion was legal only in cases of rape or in case of risk to mother’s health47. This change will help other Latin American countries to bring about a change in their respective domestic laws. In the debate of Libertarianism v. Utilitarianism, the question that is to be answered is who gets affected the most, the woman or the community and without a doubt it is the woman who gets affected the most, be it her health, her personal life and her professional life. So, the right of the women should be upheld.
- Sidhanth Mor and Mahima Chowdhary, Comparative Analysis of Right to Privacy of Woman v. Right to live of the Unborn Child, LESTLAWS (August 5, 2020), https://www.latestlaws.com/articles/comparative-analysis-ofright-to-privacy-of-woman-v-right-to-live-of-the-unborn-child/ last accessed on October 18, 2020.
- Abortion, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, https://www.who.int/health-topics/abortion#tab=tab_3 last accessed on October 18, 2020.
- Sruthisagar Yamunan, How India’s Battle To Decriminalise Gay Sex Could End Up Mirroring US Struggle For Abortion Rights, SCROLL.IN (January 9, 2018), https://scroll.in/article/864277/how-indias-battle-todecriminalise-gay-sex-could-end-up-mirroring-us-struggle-for-abortion-rights last accessed on October 18,2020.
- (2017) 10 SCC 1.
- 381 US 479 (1965)
- Simi Rose George, Reproductive Rights: A Comparative Study of Constitutional Jurisprudence, Judicial Attitudes and State Policies in India and the US, Vol 18, No. 1 (2006), STUDENT BAR REVIEW, pp 69-92, https://www.jstor.org/stable/44306647 last accessed on October 18, 2020.
- AIR 1963 SC 1295.
- AIR 1978 SC 597.
- Supra note at 6.
- (2017) 10 SCC 1.
- India: Supreme Court Declares Right to Privacy a Fundamental Right, TRILEGAL (August 31, 2017), https://www.mondaq.com/india/privacy-protection/625192/supreme-court-declares-right-to-privacy-afundamental-right , last accessed on October 19, 2020.
- Linda Greenhouse and Reva B. Seigel, Before and After Roe v. Wade: New questions about Baklash, Vol 120, No. 8 (June 2011), THE YALE LAW JOURNAL, pp 2028-2087, https://www.jstor.org/stable/41149586 last accessed on October 18, 2020.
- 410 US 113 (1973)
- Jenny Hontz and Estelle Rogers, 25 years Later: The Impact of “Roe v. Wade”, Vol 25, No 2 (Spring 1998), AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION, pp 8-11, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27880095 last accessed on October 18, 2020.
- Supra at 16.
- 405 US 438 (1972)
- 505 US 833 (1992)
- Supra at 16.
- Supra at 16.
- K. D. Gaur, Abortion and the Law in India, Vol XV, p 123-143, COCHIN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW (1991), https://www.jstor.org/stable/43951024?seq=1, last accessed on October 28, 2020.
- Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act 1971, S. 3 (2).
- Supra Note at 6.
- (1994) 3 SCC 430.
- Chapter 5, SECURING REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE IN INDIA : A CASEBOOK, https://reproductiverights.org/sites/default/files/2020-02/SecuringReproductiveJusticeIndia-Chpt05.pdf , last accessed on October 28, 2020.
- Nand Kishore Sharma v. Union of India (AIR 2006 Raj 166).
- (2009) 9 SCC 1.
- 2017 Cri LJ 218.
- 2013 SCC OnLine Del 6473.
- Supra at 25
- 2013 Cri LJ 2868 (M.P.).
- (2017) 3 SCC 462.
- 2017 Cri LJ 218.
- 2015 SCC OnLine P&H 7425.
- 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1150.
- 2018 SCC OnLine Bom 11.
- Supra at 25.
- 2015 AIR CC 3387.
- (2016) 3 RCR (Cri) 362
- Bhavikaben v. State of Gujarat, (2016) 3 RCR (Cri) 362
- Katy Watson, Argentina abortion: Senate approves legalisation in historic decision, BBC NEWS (December 30, 2020), https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-55475036 last accessed on December 30, 2020.
• Indian Penal Code, 1860
• Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971
• Medical Termination of Pregnancy Bill, 2020
• Pre-Conception Pre- Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994
• Protection of Children Against Sexual Offences Act, 2012
• Linda Greenhouse and Reva B. Seigel, Before and After Roe v. Wade: New questions about Baklash, Vol 120, No. 8 (June 2011), THE YALE LAW JOURNAL.
• Jenny Hontz and Estelle Rogers, 25 years Later: The Impact of “Roe v. Wade”, Vol 25, No 2 (Spring 1998), AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION.
• Simi Rose George, Reproductive Rights: A Comparative Study of Constitutional Jurisprudence, Judicial Attitudes and State Policies in India and the US, Vol 18, No. 1 (2006), STUDENT BAR REVIEW.
• K. D. Gaur, Abortion and the Law in India, Vol XV, p 123-143, COCHIN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW (1991)
WEB BASED ARTICLES