“Best Interest”: Karnataka HC Invokes Parens Patriae To Permit Total Abdominal Hysterectomy Of 23-Year-Old Woman With Intellectual Disability
The Bench considered that due to her inability to independently manage menstrual hygiene, the patient had suffered recurring infections, fever episodes and other health complications.
Justice Suraj Govindaraj, Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has permitted the parents of a 23-year-old woman suffering from intellectual and developmental disabilities to undergo a Total Abdominal Hysterectomy, holding that the decision was justified after a careful assessment of her health, dignity, bodily integrity and long-term welfare.
The Bench noted that Medical Board’s assessment established that the patient lacked the cognitive and intellectual ability to understand the nature, consequences and implications of the proposed procedure, rendering her incapable of exercising meaningful informed consent or independently making decisions concerning her medical treatment.
The Court also considered that due to her inability to independently manage menstrual hygiene, the patient had suffered recurring infections, fever episodes and other health complications, while her ageing parents, who were her sole caregivers, faced increasing difficulty in providing continuous care and assistance.
Justice Suraj Govindaraj observed, “…the present order is founded upon a court supervised best-interests determination and not upon any assumption that persons with disabilities may be subjected to invasive medical procedures merely because of their disability…It is only because the patient is demonstrably incapable of exercising informed decision-making and because the overwhelming medical evidence indicates that the proposed intervention would serve her welfare, health, dignity and safety that this Court considers it appropriate to grant the permission sought”.
“In exercising its parens patriae jurisdiction, the paramount consideration for this Court is the best interests of the person concerned…This Court also finds it relevant that the present case does not concern sterilisation for eugenic purposes, population control measures or any attempt to curtail the rights of the patient on account of her disability. The recommendation is founded entirely upon considerations relating to health, hygiene, dignity, safety and quality of life. The objective of the proposed intervention is to address recurring health concerns arising from a condition which the patient is incapable of understanding or managing and which has consistently exposed her to avoidable medical complications”, the Bench observed.
Advocate Zulfi Sultana appeared for the petitioner and Mohammed Jaffar Shah, AGA appeared for the respondent.
The Court was hearing a writ petition filed by the woman’s parents seeking permission to undertake hysterectomy for their daughter, who was diagnosed with Global Developmental Delay associated with Moderate Intellectual and Developmental Disability, cerebral palsy and seizure disorder.
The Court had earlier constituted a multidisciplinary Medical Board at Vanivilas Hospital, Bengaluru, comprising specialists in psychology, psychiatry, neurology, obstetrics and gynaecology, radiology and anaesthesia. The Board found that the woman had an IQ of 36, a social quotient indicating severe adaptive limitations, and was incapable of independently managing menstrual hygiene.
The Medical Board recommended that she may undergo Total Abdominal Hysterectomy after considering her medical condition and the difficulties arising from her inability to maintain menstrual hygiene.
Relying upon the Supreme Court’s judgment in Suchita Srivastava & Anr v. Chandigarh Administration AIR 2010 SC 235, the Court reiterated that reproductive choices form part of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and that persons with disabilities cannot be deprived of bodily autonomy merely because of their disability.
“The Court also notes that no less intrusive or equally effective long-term alternative has been suggested by the Medical Board. The recommendation made by the Board is therefore based upon its professional assessment as to what would best serve the interests of the patient having regard to her peculiar medical, developmental and social circumstances”, the Bench observed.
Accordingly, the Court directed Vanivilas Hospital to conduct the procedure while ensuring pre-operative counselling, psychological support, post-operative care and continued monitoring of the patient’s welfare.
Cause Title: H v. Chief Secretary To Government & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2026:KHC:29765)
Appearances:
Petitioner: Zulfi Sultana, Advocate.
Respondent: Mohammed Jaffar Shah, AGA.