Introduction:

In the landmark case of Sakshi Choudhary v. Union of India & Anr. (2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 186), The Rajasthan High Court addressed a pivotal issue concerning the intersection of women’s health and educational rights. The petitioner, Sakshi Choudhary, was denied admission to the B.Sc. Nursing program under the Armed Forces Medical Services due to a temporary health condition—low haemoglobin levels resulting from heavy menstrual bleeding. Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand presided over the matter, emphasising the importance of not allowing natural physiological processes to hinder educational opportunities for women.

Arguments Presented:

The petitioner contended that her low haemoglobin levels were a temporary condition caused by heavy menstrual bleeding, a common occurrence among women. She argued that this should not be a basis for denying her admission, especially after a subsequent medical review found her fit for the program. The Armed Forces Medical Services, however, maintained that admitting her could set a precedent, as 17 other candidates were also rejected for similar reasons. They expressed concerns about the implications of overturning established medical assessment protocols.

Court’s Judgment:

Justice Dhand ruled in favour of the petitioner, stating that menstruation-related health issues should not be grounds for denying educational opportunities. He highlighted that anaemia, particularly when caused by heavy menstrual bleeding, is a temporary and treatable condition. The court emphasised that the review medical board’s assessment, which found the petitioner fit, should take precedence. Furthermore, the court dismissed the argument regarding setting a precedent, noting that each case should be considered on its merits. Consequently, the court directed the Armed Forces Medical Services to admit the petitioner into the B.Sc. Nursing program.