There must be a reason behind Centre imposing age limit for IVF: HC

A division bench of justices Riyaz Chagla and Farhan Dubash directed the couple to amend their petition and specify whether they want to proceed with the treatment using the husband’s sperm or opt for a donor.

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday observed that the age limit prescribed by the central government for undergoing In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF) “must have a reason behind it”, as it heard a plea by a couple seeking permission to proceed with the treatment despite the man having crossed the statutory age bar of 55 in October.

Mumbai, India - Aug. 28, 2015 : Bombay High Court : ( Photo by Bhushan Koyande )

A division bench of justices Riyaz Chagla and Farhan Dubash directed the couple to amend their petition and specify whether they want to proceed with the treatment using the husband’s sperm or opt for a donor.

The couple, who got married in December 2018, approached the high court seeking permission to continue their IVF treatment after the husband turned 55 in October.

Under the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021, the age limit for IVF is 50 for women and 55 for men.

The petition stated that although the husband is medically fit, the couple had been struggling to conceive naturally and began IVF in 2020. After a few unsuccessful attempts, their doctor advised them to seek the court’s permission because of the age bar.

Citing an identical case, in which the Calcutta High Court had allowed IVF using donated gametes, the petition stated that the couple had begun the treatment before the Act was formulated. Therefore, they argued, the Act should not come in the way of their further treatment “in the interest of justice”.

The petition argued that one cannot be barred from having a child solely because they have crossed a particular age, especially when a doctor has certified that they are medically fit to conceive.

During the hearing on Wednesday, the state submitted that it had no reason to interfere in the case but stated that the age limit should be applied.

When the couple informed the court that they “may or may not use a donor,” the court remarked that such transparency is necessary at this stage. It directed the couple to amend the petition within a week and specify whether they will opt for a donor or not.