MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

CIVIL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SUIT NO/ 2356 [2024] FILED UNDER
Section 9 OF Code of Civil Procedure

IN THE CASE CONCERNING BREACH OF

MEDICAL TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY ACT 1971.

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:

NAVEEN (Plaintiff)
VERSES
GOURI (Defendant)

1
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Table of Contents
Index of Authorities Referred..............................................................................................3
Abbreviations.......................................................................................................................4
Statement of Jurisdiction.....................................................................................................5
Statements of Facts..............................................................................................................6
Statement of Issues..............................................................................................................7
Arguments Summary...........................................................................................................8
Arguments Advanced........................................................................................................10
Prayer.................................................................................................................................18
Annexures Attached...........................................................................................................19

2
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Index of Authorities Referred

1. The constitution of India 1950
2. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act 1971
3. The Hindu Marriage Act 1950
4. The code of Civil Procedure 1908
5. Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956

Previous Case Laws:

Indian Case Laws:
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. /2023 (@ SLP (Crl.) Dy. No. 33790/2023. XYZ vs State of
Delhi. – Supreme Court upheld the Foetus in the womb also have the right to live
International Case Laws:
U.S. Supreme Court officially reversed Roe v. Wade on Friday, declaring that the
constitutional right to abortion, upheld for nearly a half century, no longer exists

3
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Abbreviations
MTP Medical Termination of Pregnancy
CPC Civil procedure code
IPC Indian Penal Code
UOI Union of India
Govt Government

4
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Statement of Jurisdiction
As per section 9 of CPC, The Courts shall (subject to the provisions herein contained)
have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance
is either expressly or impliedly barred.
[Explanation I].--A suit in which the right to property or to an office is contested is a suit
of a civil nature, notwithstanding that such right may depend entirely on the decision of
questions as to religious rites or ceremonies.
2
[Explanation II].--For the purposes of this section, it is immaterial whether or not any
fees are attached to the office referred to in Explanation I or whether or not such office is
attached to a particular place.]
Plantiff has filed a Plaint under Order VII of CPC before Honorable Court
As per the MTP ACT, aggrieved can file suit in any Court

5
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Statements of Facts
Parties:
 Naveen (Husband) - Age: 38
 Gouri (Wife) - Age: 28
Marriage:
 Naveen and Gouri have been married for five years. The marriage is consummated
in the first year and was unable to get pregnant due to medical reasons
Pregnancy:
 Gouri is currently ten weeks pregnant as on 15th June 2024.
Wife's Wishes:
 Gouri desires to undergo a medical termination of pregnancy (MTP) due to career
aspirations where the Gouri is representing India in the Olympics
Husband's Wishes:
 Naveen disagrees with Gouri's decision and wishes to retain the pregnancy.
Legal Dispute:
 Gouri has scheduled an appointment for the MTP procedure.
 Naveen seeks legal intervention to prevent Gouri from undergoing the MTP.

6
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Statement of Issues
1. Whether a husband possesses any legal standing to challenge his wife's decision to
undergo a MTP.
2. Whether a woman's right to bodily autonomy extends to the decision to undergo a
medical termination of pregnancy (MTP) without spousal consent.
3. Whether the concept of spousal ownership over a pregnancy choice exists under
the applicable legal framework.
4. Whether the legal permissibility of MTP hinges solely on the presence of medical
reasons, or can it be based on non-medical grounds.

7
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Arguments Summary
The court may kindly show the mercy to stop defendant(wife) to not terminate a life in
the womb who is the child of the plaintiff(husband) too.

1. Whether a husband possesses any legal standing to challenge his wife's

decision to undergo a MTP.
a) YES. Husband possesses legal standing.
b) This is the violation of the Potential Misuse of the MTP Act as this termination
doesn’t comply with any of the reasons mentioned there since defendant has not
supplied any medical reasons.
c) As per the Section 6 of The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, the
father is the primary guardian. Unborn child also gets rights as per Article 21 of
Indian Constitution. So, it’s father’s responsibility to save the child.
d) Article 21 gives right to family life and right to parenthood. Terminating the
pregnancy infringes on his right to become a father and to have a family.
e) The pregnancy is after 5years of the marriage first consummated after much of
medications, so husband is worried about the feasibility of subsequent
pregnancies as its uncertain
f) As per the Hindu Dharma, killing of foetus is going to affect the Karmic cycle
and Moksha

2. Whether a woman's right to bodily autonomy extends to the decision to

undergo a medical termination of pregnancy (MTP) without spousal consent.
a) NO, woman’s right to bodily autonomy doesn’t extend to the MTP if spousal
consent is not there in this situation.
b) As per the Hindu Marriage Act, section2, marriage is a sacrament also where
the unity of husband and wife is emphasized. So an autonomy over a product as
a result of mutual effort cant be given to just one spouse
c) The pregnancy was a planned pregnancy and both husband and wife are equally
responsible for the pregnancy. This is an implied agreement scenario as per
section 9 of Indian Contract Act. And this is clearly a breach of the same.

8
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

3. Whether the concept of spousal ownership over a pregnancy choice exists

under the applicable legal framework
a) NO, currently there is no law which specify any special spousal ownership of
the pregnancy.
b) But Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, the father is the primary
guardian until minor age. Unborn child is a minor. So, father got guardianship
over the pregnancy.
c) Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 15(Prohibition of the Discrimination)
should give equal rights to both husband and wife in a marriage
d) Since after marriage, it’s a union of two individuals and reproduction is not
possible without both of the parents involvement, the reproductive rights should
be transformed as a joint right upon marriage.
e) Husband can take all the custodial rights of the born child for the wife don’t
want the child

4. Whether the legal permissibility of MTP hinges solely on the presence of

medical reasons, or can it be based on non-medical grounds
a) NO, MTP cant be based on any non-medical grounds.
b) As per the Section 3(4)(b) of MTP Act, it clearly describes the medical grounds
only and not a single non-medical grounds. And here defendant wife clearly
could not establish significant medical grounds which can lead to the MTP

9
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Arguments Advanced

Issue1:
The Husband's Right to Fatherhood: A Legal and Ethical Argument Against
Unilateral Abortion
The decision to terminate a pregnancy is a deeply personal one, fraught with emotional
and ethical complexities. However, when a married couple faces such a situation, the
issue transcends the individual and becomes a matter concerning the rights and desires of
both partners. This essay argues that in the given scenario, where the wife seeks an
abortion without any medical justification, the husband possesses a strong legal and
ethical case against her decision.
Legal Standing of the Husband
Firstly, it's crucial to establish the husband's legal standing in this matter. Contrary to a
common misconception, a wife does not have absolute autonomy over her body when it
comes to pregnancy within a marriage. The husband possesses legal rights regarding the
unborn child.
Misuse of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act (MTP Act)
The wife's decision to terminate the pregnancy, particularly without any medical reasons,
can be seen as a violation of the MTP Act. This Act legalizes abortion under specific
circumstances, including threats to the mother's health or severe fetal malformations. In
this case, where the wife hasn't cited medical concerns, her action could be considered a
misuse of the legal framework intended for safeguarding women's health.
Fetal Rights and Parental Responsibility
Section 6 of The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, establishes the father as
the child's natural guardian alongside the mother. This legal recognition extends even to
the unborn child. Furthermore, Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right
to life. This right can be interpreted to encompass the unborn child as well. Therefore, the
husband has a legal and moral responsibility to protect the child's right to life.
Right to Fatherhood and Family Life

10
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

The wife's decision to terminate the pregnancy infringes upon the husband's fundamental
right to fatherhood and family life. Article 21 of the Constitution also guarantees the right
to a family. By denying the husband the opportunity to become a father and experience
parenthood, the wife's action undermines his constitutional rights.
Uniqueness of the Pregnancy and Uncertainty of the Future
The essay highlights the unique nature of this pregnancy. After five years of marriage and
potentially undergoing significant medical interventions to conceive, the husband has a
legitimate concern regarding the feasibility of future pregnancies. This creates a situation
where this particular pregnancy holds immense value for the couple's desire to have a
family.
Religious Considerations
The essay acknowledges the Hindu Dharma's perspective on abortion. The belief that
terminating a pregnancy disrupts the karmic cycle and hinders the attainment of moksha
(liberation) adds another layer of ethical complexity to the situation. While this argument
may not hold legal weight, it underscores the husband's deep-seated moral objections to
the wife's decision.

11
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Issue 2:
A Delicate Balance: Navigating Bodily Autonomy and Shared Responsibility in
Unilateral Abortion Decisions
The decision to terminate a pregnancy is perhaps one of the most emotionally charged
and morally complex challenges a couple can face. While a woman's right to bodily
autonomy is a cornerstone of reproductive health, within the confines of marriage, the
question arises: can this right be exercised unilaterally, disregarding the desires and well-
being of the spouse? This essay argues that in certain situations, the husband deserves a
voice in the abortion decision, particularly when the pregnancy was planned and the wife
lacks compelling medical reasons.
Woman's Bodily Autonomy: A Fundamental Right, but Not Absolute
It is undeniable that a woman's right to control her body is fundamental. The ability to
choose whether or not to carry a pregnancy is a critical aspect of reproductive freedom.
The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act (MTP Act) acknowledges this right,
legalizing abortion under specific circumstances. However, the act focuses primarily on
safeguarding the woman's physical and mental health. It is crucial to understand that a
woman's right to bodily autonomy may not be absolute in all situations, particularly
within the context of a marriage.
Marriage as a Shared Journey: Beyond Individual Rights
The Hindu Marriage Act, Section 2, defines marriage as a sacred union emphasizing the
"unity of husband and wife." This legal framework transcends individual rights and
emphasizes the creation of a partnership. When a married couple plans and desires a
child, the pregnancy becomes a product of a shared endeavor. The decision to terminate
then disrupts the journey embarked upon by both spouses.
Bodily Autonomy vs. Shared Responsibility: Implied Consent and Breach of
Agreement
The concept of implied consent becomes relevant in this instance. Section 9 of the Indian
Contract Act recognizes an implied promise in situations where the parties' actions
suggest an agreement. Here, planning the pregnancy signifies mutual consent to
parenthood. The wife's unilateral decision to terminate the pregnancy can be viewed as a
breach of this implied agreement. The husband's emotional and financial investment
towards raising a child becomes suddenly disregarded, creating a sense of injustice.
Balancing Rights: Communication and Consideration

12
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

The solution to this complex issue cannot lie solely in enforcing spousal consent for
abortions. This essay does not advocate for complete disregard for the woman's right to
choose. However, it suggests a framework for addressing such situations.
Open and honest communication is paramount. The wife's reasons for wanting an
abortion must be understood and addressed with empathy. Perhaps unforeseen
circumstances have changed her perspective, or medical concerns have arisen. The
husband, in turn, needs to express his desires and concerns in a respectful manner.
Exploring Options: Counseling and Compromise
Seeking professional help from a therapist or a counsellor could be a valuable step. These
professionals can offer a neutral space for open communication, exploring the root of the
wife's decision and facilitating a compromise if possible. Perhaps the couple could
explore alternatives, such as adoption or delaying parenthood, respecting both individual
wishes and the shared responsibility established through planning the pregnancy.

13
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Issue 3:

Navigating the Gray Area: Reconsidering Reproductive Rights in Unilateral

Abortion Decisions
The decision to terminate a pregnancy is a profoundly personal one, laden with emotional
and ethical burdens. While a woman's right to bodily autonomy is a cornerstone of
reproductive health, the issue becomes more complex within a marital context. This essay
argues that in the absence of compelling medical reasons for an abortion, the husband, as
an equal partner in the marital union, deserves a say in the decision, particularly when the
pregnancy was planned.
The Flawed Argument of Spousal Ownership:
The notion that a husband possesses a legal right of ownership over the pregnancy is
flawed. Existing Indian laws don't explicitly grant a husband any special ownership rights
over the fetus. However, other legal principles offer a compelling framework for
considering the husband's perspective.
The Father's Guardianship: Beyond Birth
The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, establishes the father as the natural
guardian of the child alongside the mother. This legal recognition extends even to the
unborn child, suggesting a shared responsibility that begins before birth. This
guardianship right isn't absolute, but it highlights the legal recognition of the father's
involvement beyond simply procreation.
Equality for Both Spouses: A Constitutional Imperative
The Indian Constitution, through Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 15
(Prohibition of Discrimination), promotes a society where individuals, irrespective of
gender, have equal rights. Within a marriage, both husband and wife are considered equal
partners. Applying these principles to reproductive rights suggests that a unilateral
decision to terminate a planned pregnancy might be seen as discriminatory towards the
husband's equal right to parenthood.
Transforming Reproductive Rights: A Joint Decision
Marriage signifies a union, a partnership. Reproduction, by its very nature, requires the
involvement of both spouses. This essay proposes a re-framing of reproductive rights
within a marital context. Perhaps, upon entering a marriage, reproductive rights could be

14
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

viewed as a joint decision, requiring mutual consent for major decisions like terminating
a planned pregnancy.
This approach doesn't advocate for complete abrogation of a woman's right to choose.
Situations might arise where unforeseen medical emergencies or a change in the wife's
physical or mental well-being necessitate an abortion. However, in cases of planned
pregnancies, the husband's desire for fatherhood deserves consideration.
Seeking Solutions: Beyond Legal Rights
This essay acknowledges the limitations of a purely legal approach to this sensitive issue.
The focus should not be on imposing legal restrictions that infringe on a woman's bodily
autonomy. Instead, it's about fostering open communication and exploring all
possibilities.
This could involve seeking professional counseling to understand the reasons behind the
wife's decision, potentially unearthing unforeseen anxieties or concerns. Perhaps
exploring adoption as an alternative, or delaying parenthood, could offer a solution that
respects both individual needs and the shared marital bond.
Custody Rights: A Last Resort
The essay acknowledges the point that the husband could potentially seek full custodial
rights if the wife chooses to terminate the pregnancy but wants to relinquish parental
responsibility after birth. However, this is an extreme option with a significant emotional
toll on all parties involved, including the child. It should only be considered as a last
resort, after exhausting all other avenues of communication and compromise.

15
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Issue 4:

Standing on Principle: The MTP Act and the Limits of Unilateral Abortion
Decisions
The decision to terminate a pregnancy is a profoundly personal one, fraught with
emotional and ethical complexity. While a woman's right to bodily autonomy is a
cornerstone of reproductive health, the issue becomes more nuanced within a marriage.
This essay argues that the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act (MTP Act) serves as a
crucial legal framework for protecting women's health and safety during abortion. When
the wife seeks an abortion without any medical justification, the MTP Act itself offers a
compelling argument against such a decision.
The MTP Act: A Shield for Women's Health
The MTP Act, enacted in 1971, stands as a landmark legislation that safeguards women's
health by legalizing abortion under specific circumstances. Prior to this Act, unsafe
abortions were a leading cause of maternal mortality. The MTP Act recognizes the
importance of a woman's right to choose while emphasizing the necessity of medical
supervision to ensure safety.
Medical Grounds: The Cornerstone of Legality
Section 3(2) of the MTP Act meticulously outlines the permissible grounds for
terminating a pregnancy. These grounds are strictly medical, focusing on situations where
the continuation of the pregnancy poses a threat to the woman's life or physical or mental
health. Additionally, the Act allows termination in cases of severe fetal abnormalities or
pregnancies arising from sexual assault.
Non-Medical Grounds: Beyond the MTP Act
The MTP Act does not recognize any non-medical grounds for abortion. This is a
deliberate design to ensure that abortions are performed under the supervision of
qualified medical professionals and that the woman's health remains the top priority.
While personal circumstances or social pressure might influence a woman's decision, the
Act prioritizes medical considerations.
The Case at Hand: Lack of Medical Justification
In the current scenario, where the wife desires an abortion but lacks any demonstrably
significant medical reasons, the MTP Act itself becomes a powerful argument against her

16
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

decision. Terminating a pregnancy without such justification falls outside the legal
framework established to protect women's health.
Beyond Legality: Ethical Considerations
While the MTP Act stands as a legal framework, there are also ethical considerations at
play. The decision to bring a child into the world is a significant one, with both joys and
responsibilities. In a marriage, when a pregnancy was potentially planned, a unilateral
decision to terminate can create a sense of betrayal and emotional distress for the
husband.
Seeking Solutions: Respectful Communication
The MTP Act should not be misused to justify an abortion without medical justification.
Open communication between spouses is crucial. The husband should understand the
reasons behind the wife's decision, and the wife should respect the emotional investment
he might have in the pregnancy. Perhaps unforeseen circumstances have arisen, or
anxieties about parenthood are surfacing. Open communication could lead to solutions,
such as seeking professional counseling, exploring adoption, or delaying parenthood.
Respecting Rights and Responsibilities: Finding Common Ground
This essay does not advocate for complete disregard for a woman's right to choose.
However, it highlights the importance of respecting both the legal framework established
by the MTP Act and the emotional investment a husband might have in a planned
pregnancy. Finding common ground requires open communication, exploring underlying
concerns, and potentially seeking professional guidance.

17
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Prayer

Wherefore, the Petitioner humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:
(a) Grant an ex-parte interim order restraining the Respondent (Gouri) from undergoing a
Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) on the 10-week-old fetus until the next hearing
date of this case. This temporary injunction is necessary to prevent irreversible damage to
the Petitioner's right to fatherhood and the potential life of the unborn child.
(b) Upon hearing the arguments presented in full, grant a permanent injunction
restraining the Respondent from undergoing the MTP.
(c) Declare that the Respondent's decision to terminate the pregnancy without any
medical justification is arbitrary and capricious, causing immense emotional distress to
the Petitioner.
(d) Award any compensation the Court deems fit to compensate the Petitioner for the
mental anguish caused by the Respondent's actions.
(e) Grant any other relief this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice, including
an order for mediation or counseling to explore alternative solutions that respect both the
Respondent's well-being and the Petitioner's right to fatherhood.

18
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Annexures Attached
1. Plaint
2. Marriage Certificate
3. Pregnancy confirmation certificate
4. Consent form from the Defendant to do MTP
5. Certificate from doctor mentioning MTP is not harmful for the mother at this
stage

19
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA [AT BANGALORE]

Plaint
O.S. No. [To be assigned by the Court]
Naveen, aged 39 years, residing at House 234,Madhava Lane,HSR, Bangalore, Petitioner
Versus
Gouri, aged 28 years, residing at 234,Madhava Lane,HSR, Bangalore, Respondent
Subject: Petition to restrain Respondent from undergoing Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP)
without medical justification
1. Introduction
The Petitioner (Naveen) is filing this plaint against the Respondent (Gouri), his wife, seeking an order to restrain
her from undergoing a Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) on their 10-week-old fetus.
2. Petitioner and Respondent
The Petitioner and Respondent are lawfully wedded couple residing together at the aforementioned address. They
have been married for the past five years.
3. Facts of the Case
(a) The Petitioner and Respondent have been trying to conceive a child for the past five years. (b) Unfortunately,
due to the Respondent's medical condition, they were unable to conceive naturally. (c) The Respondent underwent
extensive medical treatment to address the infertility issues. (d) Thankfully, with the help of medical intervention,
the Respondent conceived a child recently. (e) The pregnancy is currently 10 weeks old. (f) To the Petitioner's
utter shock and dismay, the Respondent has expressed her desire to undergo an MTP without any medical
justification for the termination.
4. Grounds
(a) The Respondent's decision to terminate the pregnancy without any medical reason is arbitrary and capricious.
(b) The Petitioner has a strong emotional attachment to the unborn child, considering the long struggle the couple
faced to conceive. (c) The MTP Act of 1971 allows termination of pregnancy only under specific medical
circumstances to safeguard the woman's health. In this case, there is no medical justification for the MTP. (d) The
Petitioner's right to fatherhood and experience parenthood is being infringed upon by the Respondent's unilateral
decision.
5. Relief Claimed
(a) An order restraining the Respondent (Gouri) from undergoing a Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) on
the 10-week-old fetus. (b) Any other relief this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice.
6. Verification
I, Naveen, the Petitioner aforementioned, do hereby verify that the contents of this plaint are true and correct to
the best of my knowledge and belief. No part of it is false or misleading.
Dated: 15-06-2024

20
 MEMORIAL OF PLANTIFF

Place: Bangalore
[Signature]
Naveen
Petitioner
Adv. Gokulnath
BAR Licensee no: 12345 of Karnataka High Court
Advocate for the Petitioner

21