‘Right to reproductive autonomy’: Delhi High Court allows incapacitated soldier’s wife to retrieve his sperm for IVF

Interestingly, the bench opened the judgment with a Sanskrit shloka (कर्मणा दैवनेत्रेण जन्तुदेहोपपत्तय) from ‘Srimad Bhagavatam’ which translates to: “A living being obtains a body under the supervision of God.”

‘Procedure can’t defeat substantive rights’: Court

• Rejecting the government’s objection regarding the absence of fresh written consent, Justice Kaurav held that the husband’s prior decision to undergo IVF with his wife amounted to valid consent in the peculiar facts of the case.
• Emphasising the purposive interpretation of the law, the Delhi High Court added that procedural requirements under the Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Act must not defeat substantive rights, especially the fundamental right to reproductive autonomy.
• Procedure is indeed the “handmaiden of justice”, the judgment noted, adding that non-compliance with the bare, strict text of a procedural provision that destroys the substantive intent of the legislation, cannot be permitted.

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav was hearing a plea of the wife of an Indian Army soldier seeking permission for the extraction and cryopreservation of her husband’s sperm.

Marriage, parenthood plan, tragic turn

• The case concerns a Lance Naik in the Indian Army, who had married on March 4, 2017. The couple had decided to expand their family and, in June 2023, opted for assisted reproduction through IVF.
• However, tragedy struck on July 7, 2025, when the soldier suffered a severe traumatic brain injury after falling from a height while on duty in Dhoodhganga, Jammu and Kashmir.
• Despite multiple surgeries, he remains in a persistent vegetative state, with no foreseeable neurological recovery.

Plea before court, medical board’s findings

• The soldier’s wife approached the high court seeking directions to allow the retrieval and cryopreservation of her husband’s sperm so she could proceed with IVF treatment.
• The plea invoked provisions of and constitutional protections under Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty), including reproductive autonomy and the right to motherhood.
• The case primarily involved questions of consent under the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021, and whether the husband’s prior consent to IVF before his accident could be treated as valid despite his current inability to give fresh written consent.
• During the hearing on April 9, the Delhi High Court directed the constitution of a specialised medical board.
• The board later opined that while sperm retrieval was technically feasible, “chances of retrieval of viable sperm are meagre.”
• It also noted that the soldier lacked the capacity to provide informed consent due to his medical condition, as required under Section 22 of the ART Act.

Consent interpreted through conduct

• The Delhi High Court reasoned that since the couple had already initiated IVF procedures prior to the accident, it could be “safely concluded” that the husband had consented to the process.
• It further held that the wife’s consent could be treated as valid on behalf of her incapacitated husband for subsequent steps in the IVF procedure, subject to statutory compliance and medical feasibility.

Comparative legal precedents considered

• The judgment drew support from similar rulings, including a recent decision of the Kerala High Court, which allowed extraction of gametes from a brain-dead patient, and earlier observations by the Delhi High Court recognising the permissibility of posthumous reproduction where prior consent is established.
• The Delhi High Court also referred to international jurisprudence, including a decision from the England and Wales Court of Protection, underscoring the importance of respecting the reproductive intentions of individuals even in cases of incapacity.

Fate, medicine, right to hope

• Addressing concerns about low chances of successful sperm retrieval, the Delhi High Court remarked that parenthood ultimately lies beyond human control.
• The court noted that it is destiny that determines whether or not the fortune of parenthood shall get bestowed upon the petitioner and her husband.

Final directions

Allowing the plea, the Delhi High Court directed the authorities not to deny the procedure solely on the ground of absence of fresh written consent. The decision, however, remains subject to medical feasibility and compliance with other statutory requirements.