A division bench of the Bombay High Court, comprising Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Abhay Mantri, will hear two writ petitions filed by women aged 55 and 53. The women have challenged the validity of Section 21(g) of the Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Act, 2021, arguing that the age limit in the law unfairly restricts their right to access ART services.

The court will examine whether women above 50 years of age can be considered medically fit to conceive and give birth using ART.

Age Limits Under Law:

This provision lays down strict age criteria for availing ART services in India. It allows women between 21 and 50 years to undergo ART procedures, and men between 21 and 55 years to donate sperm.

The petitioners have asked to strike down this restriction. They argue that even though they have medical certificates showing they are fit to carry a pregnancy, they were still denied the chance to become mothers through ART. Their lawyer, Advocate Kalyani Tulankar, relied on certificates from a gynecologist confirming their medical fitness.

Court on Age Condition:

The Court said in its order:

“We are informed by the learned Advocate for the Petitioners that the State Government has introduced a condition in the Assisted Reproductive Technology Act, 2021, that a male sperm donor, is permitted to donate upto a maximum of 55 years of his age, and a woman, who is to accept the sperm donated and nurture the foetus in her womb, can be a recipient upto a maximum of 50 years of her age.”

Lack of Scientific Proof:

The judges also raised concerns about the lack of scientific evidence in the petitions. They said:

“We do not find any research made and pleaded in the Petitions whereby it could be prima-facie said that the Petitioner women can be held to be medically fit and competent to forbear a pregnancy in their advanced age in life and give birth to children.”

Amicus Curiae Appointed:

The Bench added:

“In such matters, where the claims are not supported by any analytical data based on medical science and research, we are of the view that an Amicus Curiae needs to be appointed to assist the Court.”

Consequently, Senior Advocate Ashutosh Kumbhakoni was appointed as Amicus Curiae. The Court also allowed Tulankar to extend full cooperation to him and, if necessary, amend the petitions with appropriate pleadings supported by research.

The Bench adjourned the hearing for three weeks and directed the same to be listed on April 22, 2026 ,on the Urgent Supplementary Board.

Case Details: Swati Sharad Parab vs Union of India [Writ Petition (Lodging) 40634 of 2025]