Reproductive Rights in India: Between Law and Life 

Abstract 

Unlike being strictly within statutes and courtrooms, reproductive rights exist in the life  experiences and realities of millions, for many who are deprived of these rights by law, and  where silence has always been considered consent. These rights go to the heart of bodily  autonomy, human dignity, and human agency. Reproductive rights in India intersect with law,  health care, gender justice, and social morality. However, while dignity and liberty are  constitutionally and theoretically available under the law for abortion and contraceptive  choice, these rights are philosophically rarely recognized and peripheral with respect to the  implementation of these rights. The reproductive rights construct has a messy, tangled origin  that has seen it beset by control-state agendas and a patriarchal system that stood in the way  of recognizing women’s bodily autonomy. This article tries to critically analyze the  constitutional underpinnings, statutory framework, and judicial activism in the field of  reproductive rights in India. It further identifies exclusionary states faced by Dalit women,  adolescents, LGBTQ+ persons, and others whose reproductive rights are ignored and  devalued. By weaving legal theory with real-world violations and policy gaps, the article  argues for a transformative, justice-based approach where reproductive autonomy becomes  non-negotiable, not conditional. 

Introduction:

Law in the Womb

The womb has long been a site of both reverence and regulation. In India, it has borne not  only children but centuries of patriarchy, moral policing, and socio-legal control.  Reproductive rights, in this context, are not merely about access to contraception or safe  abortion—they are about the freedom to live without shame, coercion, fear, and  discrimination: Gender equality and democratic justice turn. A denial of these rights is  a denial of selfhood itself.

In Suchita Srivastava v Chandigarh Administration, the Supreme Court touched upon this  fragile terrain with remarkable clarity:

“There is no doubt that a woman’s right to make reproductive choices is also a dimension of  ‘personal liberty’ as understood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”¹ 

This one sentence carries the weight of a million unheard decisions—the girl told she cannot  carry her pregnancy, the woman denied an abortion because she is unmarried, or the trans  person excluded from assisted reproductive treatment because the law does not see them as  ‘fit’. 

“Reproductive rights are not a matter of charity or privilege. They are about power—who  has it, who controls it, and who is denied it.” 

Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Gender and the Constitution Lecture, 2023¹¹ 

India’s legal system has delivered progress and pain in this battleground between control and  freedom. 

The Constitutional Promise: Articles that Breathe

Article 21: The Right to Life, Not Mere Existence

The Constitution does not name reproductive rights. Yet, it whispers to them in the guarantees  of dignity, privacy, and bodily autonomy. Article 21 has been the legal womb of these rights,  quietly nurturing them through progressive interpretations. 

In K.S. Puttaswamy v Union of India, the Supreme Court expanded the right to privacy as  intrinsic to human dignity and autonomy.² In doing so, it carved space for reproductive  freedom, intimacy, and identity, making the personal truly political. 

In Devika Biswas v Union of India, where sterilizations were conducted without consent,  often leading to deaths, the Court condemned the casual violence embedded in India’s public  health machinery.³ These are not isolated events—they are warnings that rights, without  empathy, remain lifeless. 

Articles 14 & 15: Equality with a Pulse 

The right to equality cannot stop at the hospital gate. Articles 14 and 15 speak of fairness and  non-discrimination, yet many laws and practices continue to draw illegitimate lines— between married and unmarried, able and disabled, straight and queer, urban and rural.

The Supreme Court, in X v Union of India, ruled that marital status cannot be a bar to  abortion rights.⁴ The woman at the centre of the case had been abandoned by her partner. For  many, that heartbreak would have been punishment enough. But the law, had it not been  corrected, would have forced her to carry a child she could not emotionally or socially  support. 

As the Court said: 

“Reproductive rights include the right to decisional autonomy and freedom from coercion.”⁵ 

The MTP Act: Progress and Its Pain

MTP Act 1971 (Amended 2021): A Law Caught Between Trust and Control 

India was one of the first developing countries to legalize abortion with the Medical  Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971. Yet, the law is not a right—it is a permission. Even  today, women must justify their decision, and doctors must agree. The 2021 amendments  extended the gestational limit to 24 weeks in special cases, but abortion after this remains  subject to board approval.⁶ 

The law, though progressive on paper, continues to frame abortion as a medical decision, not  a woman’s right. 

Real People, Real Fears 

In reality, abortion remains inaccessible for many, especially in rural areas, among  adolescents, or for unmarried women. The requirement for doctors’ certification, the stigma,  and the fear of judgment often push women toward unsafe procedures. The silence is  killing—and the law must start listening. 

Contraception, Consent, and the Forgotten Millions 4.1 The History of Control

India’s family planning history is marred by state overreach, especially during the Emergency  era. Even today, female sterilization accounts for over 70% of contraceptive use in India.⁷  Why is it that women bear the burden of population control, while men and the state  escape accountability?

Young and Criminalized 

Under the POCSO Act, all sexual activity under 18 is criminal, even if consensual. As a  result, healthcare providers fear prosecution if they offer abortions or contraception to  adolescents. The outcome? Girls are punished by silence, shame, and unsafe alternatives.  The law, in its moral panic, ends up punishing those it seeks to protect. 

Assisted Reproductive Technology and the Exclusion of Love 5.1 ART and Surrogacy Acts (2021): Regressive in Reform

The ART and Surrogacy (Regulation) Acts prohibit single men, LGBTQ+ individuals, and  foreign nationals from accessing parenthood through ART.⁸ This exclusion is not just legal— it is emotional violence, denying people the chance to love, nurture, and raise families. 

These laws fail to see families beyond heterosexual, biological norms, and in doing so,  reduce parenthood to privilege. 

Who Gets Left Behind: A Reproductive Justice Lens 6.1 Dalit, Adivasi, Rural and Poor Women

In 2014, over a dozen women died in sterilization camps in Chhattisgarh.⁹ No one asked why  the camps existed, why informed consent was bypassed, or why these women had no other  contraceptive options. Their deaths were not mere accidents—they were institutional apathy  in action. 

LGBTQ+ and Trans Persons 

Despite victories in NALSA and Navtej Johar, LGBTQ+ persons are excluded from  reproductive benefits.¹⁰ The law recognises their identity, but denies them the right to create  families, forcing many to live lives defined by love, but starved of legal support. 

The Way Forward: Law as a Living Entity

From Permission to Rights 

• Decriminalize abortion entirely by removing IPC Sections 312–316. 
• Make the MTP Act rights-based and eliminate medical board approvals. 
• Allow all persons, irrespective of marital or gender status, access to ART.  7.2 Healthcare with Heart 
• Ensure non-discriminatory, rights-based, and stigma-free reproductive services. 
• Train healthcare workers in empathy, consent, and inclusion. 

Education and Empowerment 

• Implement CSE in schools that respects identity, consent, and choices. 
• Legal literacy drives for women and youth to claim their reproductive rights. 

Conclusion:

Dignity is Not a Debate

The journey of reproductive rights in which India has charted out is a story of the country’s  growing out of its present which is a mix of past and present, of traditional and the modern,  of the personal and the political, and of very private issues made public. In the base of our  Constitution in the broad interpretations of Article 21 which promises of life and personal  liberty — to the progressive changes in the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act and the in  depth rules around assisted reproductive technologies, we have seen growth in our legal  structure. Also as we have seen through this that which was put forth by the law is not always  what is played out in practice and live issues do not always see the resolution they were  intended to. 

These are great truths we are discussing. For a woman the ability to determine if, which, and  when to have children is a thing beyond law; it is the base of her identity, her body’s  autonomy, and her power to chart her course in life. It empowers her to pursue study, build a  career, improve present relationships and in the end live a life of value and meaning. To deny  this choice, which may be through legal measures, social stigma, or access issues, is to break  her of her humanity, to put her in a life of what is doled out to her rather than what she chooses. “No woman can assert that she is free,” as Margaret Sanger said, which is true  today, in that she has no control over her body. This is still very much at the core of the  Indian struggle for true freedom. 

The challenges that persist are formidable: In terms of health care access, which is very  unequal geographically, we also see socioeconomic barriers that exclude the vulnerable and  very rooted cultural biases that do still stigmatize reproductive choices, particularly for the  unmarried or those who want to limit family size. Also we see the moral issues which play  out in the introduction of new reproductive technologies and the permanent balance which  has to be achieved between individual autonomy and what is best for the greater good also  require continuous and empathetic discussion. 

However, the way forward is lit by the fire of resilience and the unrelenting call for justice.  We require a large-scale approach that goes beyond what the law says to what is actually put  into practice. This includes not only health care infrastructure improvement, access to trained  personnel, and better administrative systems, but also comprehensive sex education, which  puts power in the hands of the individuals through knowledge. Also at the core of it is a social  transformation, the breaking down of patriarchal structures and stigmas which tie down  choice; instead, we see a setting which presents reproductive choices to individuals with  empathy, support, and respect, which is free from judgment and coercion. 

In the end, what we in India are aiming for with regard to reproductive rights is that each  person, including all genders, marital statuses, economic backgrounds, and geographical  locations, has the ability to exercise full reproductive autonomy with dignity, informed  choice, and total freedom from fear or discrimination. We see this as a world in which the law  is the great protector of personal freedom, in which health care is a right of birth and not a  privilege, and in which society supports the right of each individual to determine what  happens to their body and to shape their future. As we move toward a more just and equal  society that is what we must achieve in terms of access to and respect for reproductive rights  which will be our mark of progress. The pulse of autonomy is strong in us, it is the force that propels us forward into a future in which choice is celebrated and each and every life is lived  with dignity.As Justice D.Y. Chandrachud said: 

“Reproductive rights are not just about privacy or health—they are about power and  participation. They are the cornerstone of gender equality.”¹¹ 

It is time we listened—not just to the Courts, but to the countless voices that have long gone  unheard. 

Reference(S):

1. Suchita Srivastava v Chandigarh Administration (2009) 9 SCC 1.
2. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) v Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1. 3. Devika Biswas v Union of India (2016) 10 SCC 726.
3. X v Union of India (2022) SCC Online SC 1321.
4. ibid [69].
5. Medical Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Act 2021, No 8 of 2021. 7. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, NFHS-5 Factsheet (2021).
6. Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act 2021; Surrogacy (Regulation) Act 2021.
7. Human Rights Watch, ‘Sterilization Abuse in India’ (2016) https://www.hrw.org accessed 10 June 2025.
8. NALSA v Union of India (2014) 5 SCC 438; Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India (2018) 10 SCC 1.
9. D.Y. Chandrachud, ‘Gender and the Constitution’ (Public Lecture, 2023, New Delhi).