Delhi HC Verdict: Delhi High Court has given a good decision. The court has given permission to an army soldier to carry out IVF procedure. This soldier is constantly in a coma-like state. In such a situation, there is no hope of his recovery in future. Justice Purushendra Kumar Kaurav has said that the jawan’s earlier consent, which he had given while starting the IVF process, will be considered sufficient this time.

Apart from this, under the Assisted Reproductive Technology Regulation Act, the valid consent given by the wife will be considered. The court’s decision has come on the petition of the jawan’s wife. The wife had demanded in the petition that instructions should be given to extract her husband’s genetic material for IVF and keep it safe.

What did the petitioner tell in the court?

The petitioner said that in June 2023, the couple had decided to adopt IVF process to have a child. Her husband had fallen from a great height while patrolling in July 2025. Due to this he suffered serious head injury. This was a type of traumatic brain injury. After this the soldier was undergoing treatment in the army hospital. Here the couple’s IVF process was stopped. After this the woman approached the court. Claimed their rights to motherhood, dignity and reproductive autonomy under the Constitution. In its decision given on April 13, the court said that the petitioner and her husband chose the IVF process of their own free will. There is no such evidence or indication in the record. This would make it appear that the husband had not given consent for this.

Court said- This is a fundamental right

The court opined that even if there was no indication of consent from the petitioner’s husband. Nevertheless, it would be appropriate, logical, justifiable for the authorities to take steps to take the IVF process to its logical conclusion. The court said that if this is not done then the consent given earlier by the petitioner’s husband will become void.

Their original objective of adopting IVF process will become meaningless. It is an established legal principle that due process is in fact an aid to justice. In the name of merely following the literal and rigid rules of a procedural provision, destroying the very purpose of that law should not be acceptable under any circumstances.

The court said that it is important to remember that the right to reproductive autonomy is a fundamental right. The court said that the ART Act should be interpreted in such a way that the said right is promoted. Not that there should be any shortage from it. The court said that whether the petitioner will have a child or not is not in human hands. Only luck decides this. Whether a person will get the good fortune of having parents or not. During this, the court quoted Bhagwat Purana and said that a living being gets a body under the supervision of God.

Also read:

Pigeons have made the balcony of your house a home, know the easy way to drive them away