The Telangana High Court quashed the state government’s order rejecting a woman’s request to apply for surrogacy and have a child.
Allowing the suit filed by the woman, Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the HC noted that “having children carries with it significant cultural and religious implications enforcing family and social obligations crucial to societal continuity”. The judge directed the concerned officials of the Office of the Health and Family Commissioner to issue a certificate of necessity and fitness to the petitioner to proceed with surrogacy to have a child.
The 32-year-old petitioner, a doctor, got married almost four years ago. She suffered from complete androgen insensitivity (CAIS) – missing uterus and ovaries. Due to a chromosomal disorder, she could not get pregnant, so she decided on a surrogacy method. She applied to the District Medical Board under Regulation 14(a) of the Surrogacy Act-2021.
The board issued a medical indication certificate in 2023. Later, the woman approached the Second Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Tenth Additional Metropolitan Magistrate for an order of parentage and custody of the child to be born through surrogacy. In July 2024, the court issued an order in their favor. She later applied to the commissioner’s office for a certificate of fitness, only for it to be denied.
The commissioner’s office said that surrogacy is allowed in the case of a legally married man and woman from India and that transgender people are not covered by the Surrogacy Regulation Act. The report stated that the petitioner’s application could not be considered because she had a 46XY chromosome karyotype. The verdict stated that the appellant, with a chromosome karyotype of 46XY, was otherwise healthy but did not menarche or menstruate. However, her physical intercourse was normal, the judgment said.
The Surrogacy Regulation Act was intended to help women suffering from rare disorders to lead a normal married life. The petitioner and her husband were married and their Aadhaar cards confirmed that they were within the prescribed age limit. They previously had no surviving child either biologically or through adoption or surrogacy.
The rejection of the woman’s application on the grounds of a chromosomal defect was therefore not justified, the judge said.
Published – 07 March 2026 20:53 IST
