Wife, not father, has right over deceased man's sperm: Cal HCPTI | Kolkata | Updated: 22-01-2021 12:25 IST | Created: 22-01-2021 12:12 IST
The Calcutta High Court hasrefused to entertain the plea of a man seeking the right tocollect his dead son's frozen sperm, maintaining that the onlyother person, apart from the deceased, having any right to itis his wife.
Dismissing the plea on January 19, Justice SabyasachiBhattacharyya said that the petitioner does not have any''fundamental right'' to permission for collecting the preservedsperm of his son merely by dint of his father-son relationshipwith the deceased.
The petitioner's counsel submitted that the widow ofhis son, in that case, ought to be directed to give her 'no-objection' or, at least, respond to his request.
The court, however, rejected the prayer.
The sperm preserved at a hospital in Delhi belonged tothe deceased and, since he was in a matrimonial relationshiptill death, the only other person, apart from the deceased,having any right to it is his wife, the court said.
''The father-son relationship of the petitioner and thedeceased does not entail any such right of the petitioner tothe progeny of his son,'' Justice Bhattacharyya observed.
The court further said that as far as the prayer for adirection upon the wife to respond to the petitioner'scommunication is concerned, the matter is beyond the scope ofthe writ court, as it does not involve any violation offundamental or statutory right.
The petitioner contended that his son was a patient ofthalassaemia, and had preserved his sperm at the Delhihospital for use in the future.
According to the counsel, the petitioner, followingthe demise of his son, approached the hospital seeking accessto the frozen sperm on the ground that he is the father of thedeceased donor.
The hospital, on its part, informed him that the hewould need permission from the man's wife, and proof ofmarriage has to be provided.
Following such intimation by the hospital, thepetitioner urged the widow of his deceased son to issue a'no-objection' to him for collecting the sperm, thepetitioner's lawyer stated, adding that she refused toacknowledge the receipt of the communication.
(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)