In a decision balancing statutory requirements with reproductive rights, the Delhi High Court allowed a woman to extract and preserve the sperm of her husband—an incapacitated Indian Army soldier—to pursue parenthood through assisted reproductive technology.
The order came from Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, who ruled that the soldier’s earlier consent to undergo IVF treatment would remain valid even after he entered a vegetative state. The Court concluded that the couple’s joint decision, taken before the medical emergency, satisfied the consent requirement under the law.
The wife had approached the Court seeking permission to extract and cryo-preserve her husband’s sperm so she could conceive through IVF. The couple had already begun exploring assisted reproduction in 2023, but the process stalled after the soldier sustained a severe brain injury during duty in Jammu and Kashmir in 2025, leaving him bedridden and unable to provide fresh written consent.
Authorities argued that Section 22 of the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2022 prohibits cryo-preservation of gametes without explicit written consent from all parties. The Court, however, emphasized that the statute must be interpreted in harmony with the woman’s reproductive autonomy, recognized as part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The judge held that the husband’s earlier participation in IVF planning amounted to sufficient compliance with the consent requirement. The Court also directed that the wife’s consent could be treated as valid for subsequent procedural steps, making clear that authorities could not deny the request solely due to the absence of fresh written approval from the incapacitated husband.
Medical opinion from an Army hospital indicated that sperm retrieval was technically feasible, though chances of obtaining viable samples were limited. Even so, the Court said the uncertainty of success should not stand in the way of the couple’s earlier decision to try for a child.
With these observations, the Court permitted the extraction and preservation of sperm, subject to medical feasibility and compliance with statutory safeguards, effectively allowing the woman to proceed with IVF in pursuit of parenthood.
