The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that a woman who crosses the prescribed age limit of 50 years cannot continue Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) treatment, even if her embryos were lawfully created and frozen when she was within the permissible age. The Court held that the statutory age requirements must be fulfilled at every stage of the ART procedure, including embryo transfer.
Background
The Court was hearing six connected writ petitions involving couples seeking permission to continue IVF treatment despite one of the spouses crossing the maximum age prescribed under Section 21(g) of the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021.
In the lead petition, women and her husband had approached an ART clinic in November 2023, when both were 47 years old. Nine embryos were lawfully created and frozen at that time.
Two embryo transfer attempts were subsequently made in July 2024 and February 2025. While the first attempt was unsuccessful, the second resulted in pregnancy, which unfortunately had to be terminated after five to six weeks. Four frozen embryos remained at the clinic.
However, the woman crossed the statutory age limit of 50 years on December 10, 2025. Her husband remained within the prescribed age limit of 55 years. The couple approached the High Court seeking permission to use the remaining frozen embryos.
Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya examined whether the age eligibility requirement should be assessed by considering the commissioning couple as a single unit or by applying separate limits to the woman and the man.
The petitioners argued that freezing embryos while both spouses were eligible had created a continuing right to complete the treatment. They also relied on earlier judgments of the Calcutta High Court and Punjab and Haryana High Court.
Rejecting this interpretation, the Court observed that Section 21(g) clearly prescribes separate maximum age limits of 50 years for women and 55 years for men. The legislation does not provide any provision allowing treatment merely because one spouse remains within the prescribed age.
The Court explained:
"The procedure has two stages, and for every stage the age limit must be met. Merely because embryos were frozen before the woman crossed the maximum age, would not entitle her to undertake the subsequent stage of the procedure - transferring the embryo or the gamete into her reproductive system, after she has crossed the prescribed age limit as that would be violative of stipulations under the Act."
The Court also considered the report of an expert committee constituted by the Union Government, which examined medical, genetic, psychological and child-welfare concerns associated with advanced parental age.
However, the Court made an important distinction regarding a woman's independent eligibility.
It clarified that a woman can independently approach an authorised ART clinic or bank to avail reproductive services, irrespective of whether her husband has crossed the prescribed age limit, provided she herself remains below 50 years.
The Court observed:
"A woman, who may or may not be married, has been conferred an independent right under the Act to avail ART services by approaching an authorised bank or clinic and furnishing the requisite information, consent, etc., as may be required."
Accordingly, the High Court held that crossing the prescribed maximum age by either spouse results in the loss of eligibility to avail ART services as a couple. However, an eligible woman retains her independent right to undergo the procedure.
The Court disposed of all six writ petitions in these terms.
Case Details:
Case Title: V. D. and Another v. Union of India and Others & Connected Matters
Case Nuber: CWP-18704-2026 and connected cases
Judge: Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya
Decision Date: 5 November 2026
