The Supreme Court will examine the Surrogacy Regulation and Assisted Reproductive Technology Acts on February 11, 2025, following challenges to their provisions. Key issues include strict age limits and the exclusion of unmarried women from surrogacy. Petitioners argue that current laws are discriminatory, while the Centre maintains the need for regulation to prevent exploitation.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday (Jan 7th) decided to take up the critical issues surrounding the Surrogacy Regulation Act and the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021, for examination on February 11, 2025. A bench comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma heard 15 petitions challenging several provisions of these laws and directed the Centre to file its written submissions.
Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, representing the government, assured the court that the Centre would submit the necessary documents and abide by its directions.
Key Provisions Under Challenge
The 2021 laws set strict conditions for surrogacy and assisted reproductive procedures. Some of the major points include:
- Age Limits for Surrogacy:
- Intended Mother: Must be between 23 and 50 years.
- Intended Father: Must be between 26 and 55 years.
- Surrogate Mother: Must be married, aged between 25 and 35 years, and have at least one biological child. She can only act as a surrogate once in her lifetime.
- Altruistic Surrogacy Only:
- The law prohibits commercial surrogacy, allowing only altruistic arrangements where surrogate mothers receive no monetary compensation except for medical expenses and insurance.
- Regulatory Mechanisms:
- The laws mandate strict eligibility criteria and regulate oocyte donations, excluding unmarried women from participating in surrogacy arrangements.
Court’s Observations
The court stressed the need for safeguards to protect surrogate mothers from exploitation, especially since commercial surrogacy is prohibited in India.
“There can be a database, so that the same lady is not exploited. A system must be there. Nobody is saying it’s a bad idea, but at the same time, it can be badly used,”
the bench observed.
The court also proposed alternative mechanisms for compensating surrogate mothers, suggesting a designated authority to handle payments instead of the intending couples.
“You don’t have to pay directly to the lady. The department pays. You will have to deposit,”
the bench said.
Petitioners’ Concerns
Petitioners, including lead petitioner Dr. Arun Muthuvel, a Chennai-based infertility specialist, argued that the laws are “discriminatory, exclusionary, and arbitrary in nature.”
- The petitioners raised concerns about the lack of adequate compensation mechanisms for surrogate mothers, pointing out that current provisions cover only medical expenses and insurance.
- The exclusion of unmarried women and the restrictions on oocyte donations under the ART Act were also flagged as problematic.
Dr. Muthuvel’s plea argued that the laws denied autonomy, agency, and reproductive rights while promoting a state-sanctioned notion of the ideal family.
Government’s Stand
The Centre defended the current surrogacy model, with ASG Bhati affirming the government’s commitment to preventing exploitation while remaining open to suggestions for improvement.
The upcoming hearing on February 11 will address these pressing concerns, aiming to strike a balance between preventing exploitation and upholding reproductive justice.
Case Details: ARUN MUTHUVEL v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.,W.P.(C) No. 756/2022 and others
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES