Kerala High Court Orders State Inquiry into Alleged Exploitation of Women in Assisted Reproductive Practices, Citing Concerns Over Abuse of Hope and Vulnerability
Sanchayita Lahkar
The High Court of Kerala, Division Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M.B. Snehalatha voiced grave concern over reports of women allegedly brought into the State and exploited under Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) schemes. Hearing a petition filed by a fertility organisation against senior police and health authorities, the Bench noted disturbing indications of coercion and misuse involving supposed egg donors and potential surrogate mothers. Describing the revelations as deeply alarming, the Court directed the State to furnish comprehensive reports and ensure that such exploitative practices are thoroughly investigated and curtailed before the next hearing on October 10, 2025.
The matter arose from a petition filed by a fertility institution operating under the name ART Bank, represented by its managing director, against the State Police Chief of Kerala, the Station House Officer of Kalamassery Police Station, the District Medical Officer, the State of Kerala, and officials of the Health and Family Welfare Department. A government-run shelter home, Santhi Bhavan, was later impleaded as an additional respondent by the Court.
The petitioner sought the production and release of several women alleged to have been detained by the Police and Health Department. It was contended that these women had voluntarily come to the institution for medical screening and assistance as part of assisted reproductive procedures. The petitioner maintained that no illegal activity was being carried out and that the authorities had unlawfully intervened and taken custody of the women from its premises.
The State Police Chief and Health Department officials, however, alleged that the petitioner was engaged in activities contrary to law and that the women were being exploited under the guise of assisted reproductive technology (ART) programs. The authorities suspected elements of human trafficking, financial inducement, and unethical recruitment of women as egg donors or prospective surrogate mothers.
Counsel representing the shelter home informed the Court that after being taken into custody, the women were placed in Santhi Bhavan for protection. It was further submitted that there had been attempts by external actors to influence or threaten the women while they were under care. The shelter home’s counsel also pointed to advertisements and materials suggesting that the women might have been lured to Kerala with promises of financial gain.
The proceedings referred to ongoing investigations by the Police and the Health Department. No specific statutory provisions were cited in the order, though the Court acknowledged the emerging regulatory framework governing ART practices in India.
The Division Bench recorded: “For want of better words, prima facie, we can only say that we are shocked by what we have seen within the factual matrix of this case.” The Court observed that while innovation in medicine and ART had been transformative globally, “various deleterious tendencies” had emerged, especially in growing markets within low and middle-income regions. It expressed concern whether such tendencies had “percolated into our small State of Kerala also.”
The Court stated that the allegations suggested that “several women were brought to Kerala, persuaded to be either surrogate mothers in future, or egg donors, purely by the lure of the lucre.” It acknowledged the potential existence of a “wide spread attempt, to mislead couples to take treatment and finally get entangled into the web being run by several interests.” While the Court refrained from delivering any final findings at this stage, it noted the seriousness of the claims and the possibility of financial exploitation.
The Bench further recorded that “what presently bothers us is the prima facie impression of exploitation of uneducated and naive women from other parts of the State, who are attracted into this purely by promises of money.” It warned that there appeared to be “a lot of power imbalance in the situation,” with vulnerable women having little control over circumstances that could severely affect their physical and emotional well-being. The Court remarked that such activities represented “an abject breach of ethical standards and principles, shocking any human mind guided by even the faintest of humanism.”
The Bench noted that international experience had shown exploitation of both prospective parents and donors, describing ART as “a very complex procedure, often involving emotional journeys.” It observed that couples desperate for children were “drawn in by advertisements and such methods,” making them “vulnerable and ready to accept risks.” The Court recognized that the exploitation extended beyond financial concerns to include “emotional toll” and “extraction of life resources from a human body.”
The Court directed that “the respondents are directed to place on record comprehensive reports on all the action taken, proposed to be taken, as also the steps which are necessary to ensure that such tendencies are culled at its roots.”
“Since the learned Government Pleader informs us that investigation is going on and that there have been subsequent raids also – not only in the petitioner-institution, but around the State – we choose to wait a little, to find out what the Authorities are doing.”
“It becomes enjoined on us to intervene, when even a whispering semblance of exploitation is presented before us,” and added that “the Authorities concerned under the Health Department and the Police have their duty cut out, to ensure that such exploitations are effaced and not allowed to happen in future, guided by the acme constitutional imperatives and principles, which guide us on a constant basis.”
“We, consequently, adjourn this matter to be called on 10.10.2025; within which time, the respondents are directed to place on record comprehensive reports on all the action taken, proposed to be taken, as also the steps which are necessary to ensure that such tendencies are culled at its roots.”
In closing, the Bench recorded its grave concern that “assuming the facts stated before us to be true – that such tendencies are allowed in a State like ours, where literacy is highest – we are aghast and shocked. The Authorities concerned under the Health Department and the Police have their duty cut out” and directed them to “ensure that such exploitations are effaced and not allowed to happen in future.”
Advocates Representing the Parties:
For the Petitioner: Sri. Gikku Jacob, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Sri. Sunil Nath, Public Prosecutor; M/s. Ferha Azeez, Sreerag Shylan, Devananda S., and Sandhya Raju, Advocates
Case Title: Art Bank v. State Police Chief of Kerala & Others
Case Number: WP(Crl.) No. 1035 of 2025
Bench: Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M.B. Snehalatha
