Summary:
Dismissing the plea on January 19, Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya said that the petitioner does not have any "fundamental right" to permission for collecting the preserved sperm of his son merely by dint of his father-son relationship with the deceased. The sperm preserved at a hospital in Delhi belonged to the deceased and, since he was in a matrimonial relationship till 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 the deceased does not entail any such right of the petitioner to the progeny of his son," Justice Bhattacharyya observed. The petitioner contended that his son was a patient of thalassaemia, and had preserved his sperm at the Delhi hospital for use in the future. The hospital, on its part, informed him that the he would need permission from the man's wife, and proof of marriage has to be provided..